[2011] KEHC 1809 (KLR)
The court found that the facts as outlined by the prosecutor did not satisfactorily prove the offence of trafficking in narcotic drugs as defined under Section 2 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Control) Act. Instead, the facts established the offence of possession of cannabis sativa contrary to...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2011] KEHC 1809 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Anthony Peter Ndirangu; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nyeri
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 18 of 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed in part; conviction for trafficking quashed; conviction for possession substituted; sentence reduced.
- Legal Topics
- Narcotic Drugs, Sentencing Principles, Plea of Guilty
- 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
Anthony Peter Ndirangu
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence imposed for trafficking in narcotic drugs was harsh and excessive.
- 2 Whether the facts supported a conviction for trafficking or only for possession of cannabis sativa.
- 3 Whether the court could substitute a conviction for a lesser cognate offence not charged.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the facts as outlined by the prosecutor did not satisfactorily prove the offence of trafficking in narcotic drugs as defined under Section 2 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Control) Act. Instead, the facts established the offence of possession of cannabis sativa contrary to Section 3(1) as read with Section 3(2)(a) of the Act, which is a minor and cognate offence to trafficking. The court exercised its power to substitute the conviction for trafficking with that of possession, quashed the original sentence, and imposed a new sentence of five years imprisonment for possession. The court held that it was within its jurisdiction to make such a...
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed in part; conviction for trafficking quashed; conviction for possession substituted; sentence reduced.
Orders
- The conviction for trafficking in narcotic drugs is quashed.
- The sentence of 10 years imprisonment and fine of Ksh.100,000 is set aside.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
16 paragraphs
REPUBLICOF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NYERI
CRIMINAL APPEAL CASE NO. 18 OF 2008
ANTHONY PETER NDIRANGU.…………………….………………..APPELLANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC………………………….…………………………..……RESPONDENT
(Appeal arising from the original conviction and sentence by R. A. A. Otieno Senior Resident Magistrate in the Nyeri Chief Magistrate’s Criminal Case No.2892 of 2007 delivered on 11th January 2008 at Nyeri)
JUDGMENT
Anthony Peter Ndirangu, the appellant herein, was convicted on his own plea of guilty to the offence of trafficking in narcotic drugs contrary to Section 4(a) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (control) Act No. 4 of 1994. The particulars of the offence are that on 5th October 2007 at about 15. 00 hrs at Kahuro area, Gathuthi Sub-location, in Nyeri district within Central Province, the Appellant was found trafficking in 5 (250gm) stones of cannabis by transportation valued at Ksh.3,000/= which was not in its medicinal preparation in contravention of the said Act. The Appellant was then sentenced to serve 10 years imprisonment and was also ordered to pay a fine of Ksh.100,000/=. Being aggrieved, the Appellant is before this Court seeking to overturn the order on sentence.
The Appellant has cried foul that the sentence tendered was harsh and excessive. Mr. Makura, learned Senior State Counsel, was of the view that the sentence was in fact lenient hence it should be rectified to include a fine of Ksh.1,000,000/= instead of Ksh.100,000=. The facts outlined by the court prosecutor indicates that the Appellant was ambushed and confronted by the Police. Upon being searched, the Police found him with five stones of greenish material which was later confirmed by the government chemist to be cannabis sativa. In my view the facts outlined by the court prosecutor did not satisfactorily prove the offence of trafficking within the definition given inSection 2of the same Act. I have no doubt that the facts outlined by the Prosecutor proved the offence of possession of cannabis sativa contrary to Section 3(1) as read with Section 3(2) (a)of the Act. That is a minor and cognate offence to that of trafficking. This court has the power to substitute the conviction at this stage although the Appellant was not charged with that offence. I do hereby substitute the conviction for the offence of trafficking with that of possession as proposed herein above.
For the above reasons, I allow the appeal to the extent that I quash the conviction for the offence of trafficking in narcotic drugs, set aside the sentence of 10 years imprisonment and the fine of Ksh.100,000/= and substitute therefore a conviction for the offence of possession of cannabis contrary toSection 3 (1) as read with Section 3(2) (a) of the Act for which I sentence the Appellant to serve five (5) years imprisonment. The sentence is to run from the date of sentence i.e. on 11th January 2008.
Dated and delivered at Nyeri this 17th day of June 2011.
J. K. SERGON
JUDGE
In open court in the presence of the Appellant one Mr. Makura for State.