[2019] KEHC 11888 (KLR)
The High Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain an application for revision of a sentence that has already been confirmed on appeal. Once an appeal has been heard and determined, the appellate court's decision is final regarding the matters raised and determined therein. The applicants, having already appealed their...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEHC 11888 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Cornel Oketch Ochieng; Appellant: Vitalis Okoth Omondi; Appellant: Ibrahim Onyango Omondi; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Siaya
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision 170, 171 & 172 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Revision of Sentence After Dismissal of Appeal
- Outcome
- applications dismissed for want of jurisdiction and as abuse of process
- Judges
- RE Aburili
- Legal Topics
- Revision of Sentence, Jurisdiction of High Court, Abuse of Court Process
- 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
Cornel Oketch Ochieng
Appellant
Vitalis Okoth Omondi
Appellant
Ibrahim Onyango Omondi
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Revision of Sentence After Dismissal of Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to revise a sentence that has already been confirmed on appeal.
- 2 Whether the applicants' attempt to seek revision after appeal constitutes an abuse of court process.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain an application for revision of a sentence that has already been confirmed on appeal. Once an appeal has been heard and determined, the appellate court's decision is final regarding the matters raised and determined therein. The applicants, having already appealed their convictions and sentences and had their appeals dismissed, cannot subsequently seek revision of the same sentences. Such applications are not only incompetent but also constitute an abuse of the court process. The court, therefore, dismissed the applications for lack of jurisdiction and for being mischievous and an abuse of process.
Court Disposition
applications dismissed for want of jurisdiction and as abuse of process
Orders
- The applications for revision are dismissed.
- The file is closed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT SIAYA
CRIMINAL DIVISION
SIAYA CR. REV. NO. 170, 171 AND 172 OF 2018
CORNEL OKETCH OCHIENG …………….…….……... 1ST APPELLANT
VITALIS OKOTH OMONDI ……………………………… 2ND APPELLANT
IBRAHIM ONYANGO OMONDI ………………………… 3RD APPELLANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC ……………………………………………………... RESPONDENT
(Being an application for Revision of sentence in Ukwala PMCRC No. 556 of 2016 dated 2. 3.2017).
RULING
1. On 14. 11. 2018 the Convict Cornel Oketch Ochieng filed this Revision/Application urging the Court to revise his sentence of 6 years imprisonment following a conviction vide Ukwala P.M. Cr. Case No. 565/2016 on 2. 3.2017. The offence charged was Arson and Assault.
2. However, I ordered for the trial Court record and Probation Officer’s Report which were not forthcoming.
3. In the meantime, this Court has learnt that the Convict had appealed vide Siaya H.CR. A 27, 28 and 30 of 2017 consolidated with his Co-convict’s appeals and Court records show that on 27. 8.2018, this Court delivered a judgment in the above consolidated appeals involving Cornel Oketch Ochieng and Ibrahim Onyango Omondi, dismissing their respective appeals.
4. The same Appellants/Convicts have sought for revision of their respective sentences vide Revision Application No. 170, 171 and 172 of 2019.
5. I have considered the three applications by Vitalis Okoth Omondi, Cornel Oketch Ochieng and Ibrahim Onyango Omondi. As the Law does not allow appeal and revision of sentence together. I find and hold that I lack the necessary jurisdiction to review sentence which was confirmed on appeal
6. These applications are an abuse of Court process and mischievous.
7. They are dismissed
8. The file is closed.
DATED AT SIAYA THIS 26 DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2019.
HON. LADY JUSTICE R. E. ABURILI
JUDGE