[2021] KEHC 1589 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant was not remorseful, as evidenced by his justification that he was only reclaiming his father’s land. The offences of malicious damage to property and theft were serious, involving property valued at Ksh 30,000. The court held that a custodial sentence was necessary for deterrence...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEHC 1589 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Abraham Mwenda; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision E223 of 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Revision of Sentence
- Outcome
- application for revision of sentence declined
- Judges
- EM Muriithi
- Legal Topics
- Malicious Damage to Property, Theft, Sentencing Principles, Revision of Sentence
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Abraham Mwenda
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Revision of Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the custodial sentence imposed on the accused for malicious damage to property and theft was excessive and should be revised.
- 2 Whether the accused's lack of remorse and justification for the offence warranted a non-custodial sentence.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant was not remorseful, as evidenced by his justification that he was only reclaiming his father’s land. The offences of malicious damage to property and theft were serious, involving property valued at Ksh 30,000. The court held that a custodial sentence was necessary for deterrence and that the two-year imprisonment on each count, to run concurrently, was not excessive. The recommendation for community service was rejected due to the applicant's attitude and the gravity of the offences. Consequently, the application for revision of sentence was declined.
Court Disposition
application for revision of sentence declined
Orders
- The application for revision of sentence is declined.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT MERU
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO. E223 OF 2021
ABRAHAM MWENDA...........................................................................................APPLICANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC.............................................................................................................RESPONDENT
RULING
1. The accused was sentenced to 2 years imprisonment on two counts, running concurrently for the offences of ‘Malicious Damage to Property’ contrary to Section 339 (1) of the Penal Code and ‘Theft’ contrary to Section 275 of the Penal Code, the subject of the damage and theft being 30 fencing posts valued at Ksh 30,000/=.
2. The Probation Officer’s report recommends community service placement service at Tigania Probation Office. The DPP opposed the revision citing the gravity of the offence and the lack of remorse by the accused person upon conviction.
3. In his response to the conviction at mitigation, the accused said “I did not bother the complainant. I was only reclaiming my father’s land.” The Court agrees that the accused was not remorseful and would likely repeat the offence as he considers he is “only reclaiming my father’s land.” A custodial sentence is appropriate for deterrence, and his imprisonment for 2 years on each count is not excessive.
ORDERS
4. Accordingly, for the reasons set out above, the revision of sentence is declined.
Order accordingly.
DATED AND DELIVERED THIS 25TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021.
EDWARD M. MURIITHI
JUDGE
Appearances:
Abraham Mwenda, the Applicant in person.
Ms Nandwa, Prosecution Counsel for the Respondent.