[2024] KEHC 15112 (KLR)
The court held that the applicant had already benefitted from a reduction of sentence from life imprisonment to 35 years on appeal, based on the Muruatetu jurisprudence as it then stood. With the Supreme Court's subsequent clarification that mandatory sentences under the Sexual Offences Act are constitutional and...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEHC 15112 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Ezekiel Onyango Aloo; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Siaya
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Petition 34 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Petition / Ruling on Sentence Review Petition
- Outcome
- petition dismissed
- Judges
- RE Aburili
- Legal Topics
- Sentence Review, Sexual Offences Act, Mandatory Sentences, Application of Section 333 2 Cpc, Resentencing Jurisprudence
- 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
Ezekiel Onyango Aloo
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Petition / Ruling on Sentence Review Petition
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to further sentence review under Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code after sentence reduction on appeal.
- 2 Whether the court retains discretion to further reduce the applicant's sentence in light of recent jurisprudence on mandatory sentences under the Sexual Offences Act.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the applicant had already benefitted from a reduction of sentence from life imprisonment to 35 years on appeal, based on the Muruatetu jurisprudence as it then stood. With the Supreme Court's subsequent clarification that mandatory sentences under the Sexual Offences Act are constitutional and lawful, the court found that it no longer retained residual discretion to further reduce the sentence under Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The application for further sentence review was therefore found to be misplaced and was dismissed.
Court Disposition
petition dismissed
Orders
- The petition dated 12/6/2023 is dismissed.
- This file is closed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
Aloo v Republic (Criminal Petition 34 of 2023) [2024] KEHC 15112 (KLR) (22 November 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 15112 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Siaya
Criminal Petition 34 of 2023
RE Aburili, J
November 22, 2024
Between
Ezekiel Onyango Aloo
Applicant
and
Republic
Respondent
Ruling
1. The Petitioner Ezekiel Onyango Aloo is a convict in Siaya SPM SO 15/2019 where he was sentenced to serve life imprisonment upon conviction under Section 8 (2) of the Sexual Offences Act. The minor victim was aged 7 years old. The Petitioner appealed vide HCCRA 82/2019 which appeal against conviction was dismissed vide judgment rendered on 29/9/2020, which judgment reduced life imprisonment to 35 years imprisonment to run from the date of sentence in the lower court on 18/11/2019. This was in view of the Muruatetu I and Jared Injiri Koita V. R (2019) eKLR decision which this court adopted in reducing sentence.
2. Vide Misc. Cri. Application E127/2022, the same petitioner convict herein sought for sentence review which this court dismissed on account of the reduction of sentence on appeal as stated above. The court found the application for resentencing to be mischievous, frivolous and vexatious.
3. The convict is back with another petition herein dated 12/6/2023 seeking for sentence review under Section 333 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
4. I have considered the application and in view of the sentence reduction in HCCRA 82/2019 which was clear on the commencement date, where the convict benefitted from the Muruatetuu case before it was clarified by the Supreme Court and now in view of the further clarification in Republic v Joshua Gichuki Mwangi [2024]e KLR that the mandatory sentences under the Sexual Offences Act are lawful and constitutional, it is clear that the convict was lucky to have had life imprisonment reduced to 35 years imprisonment and therefore there is no more residual discretion left to be exercised under Section 333 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. If the court were to acceded to what the convict is asking, it would take into account the period that he has served as part of the life imprisonment before reduction to 35 years imprisonment.
5. Accordingly, the petition dated 12/6/2023 is found to be misplaced. It is dismissed. This file is closed. Signal to issue.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT SIAYA THIS 22ND DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024R. E. ABURILIJUDGE