[2020] KEHC 9672 (KLR)
The court found that the trial court failed to consider the period the applicant spent in remand custody, as required by Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The applicant had already served a significant portion of his sentence, including the remand period, amounting to almost two-thirds of the custodial...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEHC 9672 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Ahmed Abdul Majid; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision 246 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Sentence Reduction
- Outcome
- application allowed; sentence commuted to period served; applicant released
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Principles, Remission of Sentence, Stealing by Servant, Consideration of Remand Period
- 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
Ahmed Abdul Majid
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Sentence Reduction
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the trial court erred by failing to consider the period spent in remand custody when sentencing the applicant.
- 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to a reduction or commutation of sentence based on time served and other mitigating factors.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the trial court failed to consider the period the applicant spent in remand custody, as required by Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The applicant had already served a significant portion of his sentence, including the remand period, amounting to almost two-thirds of the custodial term. Given the applicant's remorse, status as a first offender, and the absence of opposition from the prosecution, the High Court exercised its revisionary jurisdiction to commute the sentence to the period already served and ordered the applicant's immediate release unless otherwise lawfully held.
Court Disposition
application allowed; sentence commuted to period served; applicant released
Orders
- The applicant's custodial sentence is commuted to the period served.
- The applicant is to be set at liberty forthwith unless otherwise lawfully held.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CRIMINAL DIVISION
CRIMINAL REVISION NUMBER 246 OF 2019
AHMED ABDUL MAJID.................................APPLICANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC...................................................RESPONDENT
RULING
1. The Applicant,Ahmed Abdul Majid was charged with the offence of stealing by servant contrary to Section 268 (1) as read with Section 281of the Penal Code. He was convicted on his own plea of guilty and sentenced to serve two (2) years imprisonment on 1st March 2019.
2. By a Chamber Summons Application filed on 20th September, 2019, he seeks a reduction of the sentence passed against him. The application is supported by a self-sworn affidavit and the grounds for the same are contained in a document titled ‘Memorandum of Revision’. He states that he is a patient of haemorrhoids which reoccurred and exacerbated while in prison. He also states that he is a family man and the sole bread winner with six young children and his wife is a kidney patient who needs dialysis every three months. Further, he states that he is a first offender and prays for a community service order in place of the custodial sentence. He further states that he is fully rehabilitated and is remorseful to the honourable court and the society. Finally, he urges the court to invoke the provisions of Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code to direct that the period he spent in remand be computed as part of his sentence.
3. During the hearing of the Application, the Applicant reiterated the foregoing grounds. He further asked the court to deduct the period of three months spent in remand custody prior to his conviction from his sentence which he only has two months to complete. He also reiterated that he is remorseful and prayed for forgiveness. The learned State Counsel, Ms. Nyauncho did not oppose the application. She however noted that the Applicant is set to complete his sentence in July, 2020.
4. Section 362 of the Criminal Procedure Code provides as follows regarding this courts revisionary powers:-
“The High Court may call for and examine the record of any criminal proceedings before any subordinate court for the purposes of satisfying itself as to the correctness, legality or propriety of any finding, sentence or order recorded or passed, and as to the regularity of any proceedings of any such subordinate court.”
5. The Applicant was accused of stealing 11,758 litres of diesel valued at Kshs. 1,293,380/= on the 2nd day of November, 2018 from his employer Lochab Transport Limited. As mentioned earlier, he pleaded guilty to the offence. Section 281 of the Penal Code prescribes a maximum sentence of seven years imprisonment for this offence. Hence, note that the trial court correctly exercised its discretion in imposing a two years custodial sentence on the Applicant after considering his probation report as well as the victim’s statement that the company lost a lot of money as a result of the criminal act of the Applicant who had been employed as a fuel attendant.
6. However, it is evident that the trial court did not take into account the period that the Applicant had spent in remand custody from 29th November, 2018 when he was arrested to 1st March, 2019 when the sentence was passed. Section 333(2)of the Criminal Procedure Code requires that the period which an accused person spent in remand custody be taken into account prior to sentencing. This court takes into account the aforesaid period of three months which is hereby deducted from the two years term. This therefore means that the Applicant has cumulatively served a period of seventeen months and three days which is almost two thirds of his sentence and may entitle him to benefit from remission.
7. Consequently, this application is hereby allowed. The Applicant’s custodial sentence is commuted to the period served. I order that the Applicant be and is hereby set at liberty forthwith unless otherwise lawfully held. It is so ordered.
Dated and delivered at Nairobi This 5th May, 2020
G.W.NGENYE-MACHARIA
JUDGE
In the presence of:
1. Applicant in person.
2. M/s Akunja for the Respondent.