[2025] KEHC 5113 (KLR)

[2025] KEHC 5113 (KLR)

The court found that the trial court failed to consider the period the applicant spent in remand custody before sentencing, as required by section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The applicant was in custody from 2 January 2018 to 17 April 2019, totaling 15 months and 15 days. The omission contravened both statutory requirements and sentencing policy guidelines, which mandate that such time be credited against the sentence to avoid disproportionate punishment. The court therefore allowed the application and ordered that the period spent in remand custody be taken into account when computing the applicant's sentence.

Citation
[2025] KEHC 5113 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Abdirahman Adow Abdullahi; Respondent: Republic
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Garissa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
30 April 2025
Case Number
Miscellaneous Criminal Application E011 of 2025
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Sentence Revision Application
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
JN Onyiego
Legal Topics
Sentencing Revision, Remand Custody Credit, Sexual Offences, Application of Section 333 2 Cpc
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Sentencing Revision Remand Custody Credit Sexual Offences Application of Section 333 2 Cpc

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Abdirahman Adow Abdullahi

Applicant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Sentence Revision Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial court erred by failing to take into account the period the applicant spent in remand custody when passing sentence.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to have the period spent in remand custody deducted from his sentence under section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the trial court failed to consider the period the applicant spent in remand custody before sentencing, as required by section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The applicant was in custody from 2 January 2018 to 17 April 2019, totaling 15 months and 15 days. The omission contravened both statutory requirements and sentencing policy guidelines, which mandate that such time be credited against the sentence to avoid disproportionate punishment. The court therefore allowed the application and ordered that the period spent in remand custody be taken into account when computing the applicant's sentence.

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • The period spent in remand custody by the applicant shall be taken into account when computing his sentence.