https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/9209
The application for revision was dismissed because the applicant had already filed an appeal that was dismissed, so the High Court was not the correct forum; the proper forum was the Court of Appeal.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2026] KEHC 9209 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: BOIGNAN AUDE BERTILLE DANHO; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision E090 of 2026
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Revision of Sentence After Conviction and Dismissal of Prior Appeal
- Outcome
- Application dismissed.
- Judges
- ["DR Kavedza"]
- Legal Topics
- Trafficking in Narcotic Drugs, Revision of Sentence, Jurisdiction After Dismissed Appeal, Non Custodial Sentence
- 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
BOIGNAN AUDE BERTILLE DANHO
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Revision of Sentence After Conviction and Dismissal of Prior Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the High Court could revise the applicant's sentence after his appeal had already been dismissed.
- 2 Whether the applicant had shown sufficient basis for a non-custodial revision of sentence.
Ratio Decidendi
The application for revision was dismissed because the applicant had already filed an appeal that was dismissed, so the High Court was not the correct forum; the proper forum was the Court of Appeal.
Court Disposition
Application dismissed.
Orders
- The application for revision is dismissed.
- Each party to bear its own consequences as ordered by the court accordingly.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
**REPUBLIC OF KENYA** **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KIBERA** **CRIMINAL REVISION NO. E090 OF 2026** BOIGNAN AUDE BERTILLE DANHO………………………………APPLICANT VERSUS REPUBLIC…………………………………………………………RESPONDENT **RULING** 1. The applicant was charged and convicted for the offence of trafficking in narcotic drugs contrary to section 4 (1) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Control) Act, No. 4 of 1994. He was sentenced to serve 25 years imprisonment in addition to payment of a fine of Kshs 91.80 million in default to serve an additional 1 year. 2. He filed an application seeking revision of sentence. He argued that the time spent in prison has been sufficient rehabilitation. He urged the court to revise the sentence to a non-custodial sentence. 3. I have considered the application, the arguments in support and the applicable law. From the record, the applicant filed an appeal which was dismissed by Hon. Chepkwony J. 4. In the circumstances, the right forum for the applicant is the Court of Appeal. As such, the application is dismissed. Order accordingly. **Ruling dated and delivered this 30th day of June 2026** **\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_** **D. KAVEDZA** **JUDGE**