[2017] KEHC 2348 (KLR)
The court held that the applicant, having been convicted on her own plea of guilty and being aggrieved by both conviction and sentence, was in the category of persons contemplated by Section 364(5) of the Criminal Procedure Code. Since she could have appealed the decision, she was barred from seeking revision. The...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEHC 2348 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Alice Jerotich Koilege; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Eldoret
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision 130 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- CW Githua
- Legal Topics
- Revision Jurisdiction, Plea of Guilty, Appeal Vs Revision, Sentence Review
- Source Language
- english
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Alice Jerotich Koilege
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant's plea of guilty was equivocal and improperly entered.
- 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to revision of her conviction and sentence under the Criminal Procedure Code.
- 3 Whether the court has jurisdiction to entertain the application for revision where an appeal was available.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the applicant, having been convicted on her own plea of guilty and being aggrieved by both conviction and sentence, was in the category of persons contemplated by Section 364(5) of the Criminal Procedure Code. Since she could have appealed the decision, she was barred from seeking revision. The grounds raised by the applicant were more appropriate for an appeal rather than a revision. The court therefore lacked jurisdiction to entertain the application for revision and dismissed it accordingly.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application for revision is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT ELDORET
HIGH COURT CRIMINAL REVISION NO. 130 OF 2017
ALICE JEROTICH KOILEGE …………………………….APPLICANT
-VERSUS-
REPUBLIC.………………………………….…………...RESPONDENT
RULING
1. Following my orders/directions issued on 5th October, 2017, the original record in Eldoret Criminal Case No. 3736 of 2017 has now been placed before me.
2. I have perused the said record and considered the Notice of Motion dated 4th October, 2017 and the deposition made by the applicant Alice Jerotich Koilegeon the same date in support thereof.
3. In the main, the applicant seeks a review of her conviction and sentence. She requests the court to find that her plea of guilty was equivocal and improper. She also seeks that the sentence imposed upon her by the trial court be revised and substituted with a non-custodial sentence.
4. In seeking a review of her conviction, the applicant contends that she pleaded guilty under duress from police officers; that the charge was read in a language she did not understand; that she was not given an opportunity to dispute the facts of the case.
5. In support of her plea for review of sentence, she claims that she is unwell and needs to access proper diet and medication which are not available in prison; that she is a single parent with children of tender years.
6. The court’s revisionary jurisdiction is donated by Section 362 as read with Section 364 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC). These two provisions read together leave no doubt that the court can only exercise this jurisdiction if it is satisfied that there was an illegality, irregularity, mistake or impropriety in the decision, sentence or orders sought to be reviewed.
7. Section 364(5) of the CPC prohibits this court from entertaining applications for revision at the instance of a party who could have appealed against the order or decision sought to be reviewed.
8. In this case, the applicant was the accused person in the aforesaid criminal case. She was convicted on her own plea of guilty. The grounds anchoring the motion and the depositions made by the applicant shows clearly that she was aggrieved by her conviction and sentence. Infact, the grounds relied upon by the applicant resonate more with an appeal against conviction and sentence than with an application for revision. Having been dissatisfied with her conviction and sentence, the applicant ought to have appealed against the trial court’s decision instead of filing the instant application for review.
9. Given my finding that the applicant is in the class of persons contemplated under Section 364 (5) of the CPC, it is my conclusion that this application is not merited and it is hereby dismissed.
It is so ordered.
C.W GITHUA
JUDGE
DATED, SIGNEDandDELIVEREDat ELDORETthis11thday ofOctober, 2017.