[2021] KEHC 8419 (KLR)
The court held that while Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code requires that time spent in custody prior to sentencing be considered, this issue had already been raised and determined by the High Court during the applicant's appeal. The applicant had been remanded due to his own breach of bond conditions,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEHC 8419 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Antony Gitonga Kabugi; Respondent: Director of Public Prosecutions
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Mombasa
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Petition 48 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Resentencing Application / Judgment
- Outcome
- petition dismissed
- Judges
- DO Ogembo
- Legal Topics
- Resentencing, Remand Periods, Sentence Computation, Manslaughter, Section 333 2 Criminal Procedure Code
- 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
Antony Gitonga Kabugi
Applicant
Director of Public Prosecutions
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Resentencing Application / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the period spent in remand custody prior to sentencing should be included in the computation of the applicant's sentence under Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
- 2 Whether the High Court can revisit an issue already determined in a previous appeal regarding sentence computation.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that while Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code requires that time spent in custody prior to sentencing be considered, this issue had already been raised and determined by the High Court during the applicant's appeal. The applicant had been remanded due to his own breach of bond conditions, and the High Court had provided reasons for not including the remand period in the sentence computation. As the matter had already been deliberated and dismissed by a court of coordinate jurisdiction, the present court could not reconsider it. Consequently, the petition was found to be without merit and was dismissed.
Court Disposition
petition dismissed
Orders
- The petition is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
26 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT MOMBASA
PETITION NO. 48 OF 2019
ANTONY GITONGA KABUGI..............................PETITIONER
VERSUS
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS......RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT ON RESENTENCING
1. The Petitioner herein ANTONY GITONGA KABUGI was charged with the Offence of Manslaughter contrary to 205 of the Penal Code.
2. The particulars of the case were that “on 30th July, 2010 at Shimazi police lines Mombasa District within Coast Province he unlawfully killed Mathias Muoka.”
3. He was sentenced to 20 years imprisonment. Upon appeal to the High court, he was sentenced to 15 years imprisonment.
4. The Petitioner is now in this court pursuant to Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, seeking for his conviction to be calculated from date of his arrest.
5. Ms. Wanjohi, learned counsel for the State submitted that the Petitioner is seeking for inclusion of the time spent in remand in his sentence. Counsel submitted that during the appeal to the High Court, the court noted that the Petitioner was released on bond on 15/8/2011. He absconded court and was taken to court on 28/5/2012 under warrant of arrest. The Petitioner had breached the law on bond pending trial. He was put back in remand due to his own mistake and therefore lost his right to have his sentence computed from the date of his arrest. Counsel submitted that the High Court had given its reasons for not computing the sentence as per Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. Counsel submitted that the petition lacks merit and should be dismissed.
6. The Petitioner on his part submitted that this Court does consider the time he spent in remand to be part of his sentence as a right under the Constitution and Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
7. I have considered the application, the relevant law herein as well as the submissions by both the Applicants and the Respondent. Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code provides that:
“(2) Subject to the provisions of section 38 of the Penal Code every sentence shall be deemed to commence from, and to include the whole of the day of, the date on which it was pronounced, except where otherwise provided in this Code.
Provided that where the person sentenced under subsection (1) has, prior to such sentence, been held in custody, the sentence shall take account of the period spent in custody.”
8. It is mandatory that the period during which an accused had been held in custody prior to being sentenced be taken into account in meting out the sentence. However, this issue arose in a court of coordinate jurisdiction but the computation was not granted. This means that the High Court had already deliberated on the issue and dismissed it. The High Court cannot now consider the same issue.
9. In the upshot, the Petition is devoid of merit and is hereby dismissed.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT MOMBASA THIS 11TH DAY OF MARCH, 2021.
E. K. OGOLA
JUDGE
Judgment delivered via MS Teams in the presence of:
Petitioner in person
Ms. Wanjohi for the DPP
Mr. Josephat Court Assistant