https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/11333
The application succeeded because the remand period was not taken into account when the trial court imposed sentence, and Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code is mandatory. The applicant therefore was entitled to credit for 1 year, 11 months and 20 days spent in custody before sentencing.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2026] KEHC 11333 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: BRIAN MULONGO WEPUKHULU; Respondent: REPUBLIC
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision E007 of 2026
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling on Sentence Revision
- Outcome
- Application allowed
- Judges
- ["E Ominde"]
- Legal Topics
- Section 333(2) CPC Credit for Remand Period, Revision of Sentence, Grievous Harm Under Penal 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
BRIAN MULONGO WEPUKHULU
Applicant
REPUBLIC
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Sentence Revision
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court should factor the applicant’s remand custody period into the sentence under Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code
- 2 Whether the trial court failed to account for time spent in custody before sentencing
Ratio Decidendi
The application succeeded because the remand period was not taken into account when the trial court imposed sentence, and Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code is mandatory. The applicant therefore was entitled to credit for 1 year, 11 months and 20 days spent in custody before sentencing.
Court Disposition
Application allowed
Orders
- The period of 1 year, 11 months and 20 days spent in remand custody shall be factored into the applicant’s 7-year sentence.
- Right of appeal within 14 days.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
**REPUBLIC OF KENYA** **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT BUNGOMA** **CRIMINAL REVISION NUMBER E007 OF 2026** **BRIAN MULONGO WEPUKHULU …………………………..... APPLICANT** **VERSUS** **REPUBLIC………………………………………................…. RESPONDENT** **RULING** 1. The Applicant herein moved this Court by way of undated Notice of Motion wherein prays to Court that as provided under **Section 333(2) of the** **Criminal Procedure Code**, the Court considers and factors into his sentence the period that he spent in remand custody during the trial. 2. In the Affidavit is support of the Application, he states that he was charged with the offence of **Grevious Harm** Contrary to **Section 234 of the Penal Code**, convicted and sentenced to 7 years’ imprisonment in Criminal Case No. E1250 of 2022. He states that he has no issue with the conviction and the sentence save for his prayer under **Section 333(2)** aforementioned. 3. Counsel for the State in his oral representations stated that he has no objection to the period that the Applicant spent in remand be factored into the Applicant’s 7 year’ sentence as he has prayed. I have considered the Applicant’s Application. I have taken into consideration the fact that the provision under which the application has been made is a mandatory provision and in this regard, the Application has merit. 4. I have perused the record of the proceedings of sentencing. It shows that the remand period was not factored into the sentence of 7 years’ imprisonment that the trial court imposed. The record shows that the Applicant was charged on 29th September 2022 and remanded in custody until 18th September 2024 when he was sentenced. 5. This brings the period that the Applicant spent in custody to 1 Year, 11 Months and 20 days. I therefore allow the Applicant’s Application and direct the period of 1 Year, 11 Months and 20 days that the applicant spent in remand custody be factored into his sentence of 7 years’ imprisonment. 6. Right of Appeal 14 days **Read dated and Signed at BUNGOMA on 23rd July 2026.** **E. OMINDE** **JUDGE**