Cheruiyot v Republic (Criminal Miscellaneous Application E213 of 2024) [2026] KEHC 5236 (KLR) (23 April 2026) (Ruling)
The High Court lacks jurisdiction to review or alter the sentence computation after an appeal has been determined by a court of concurrent jurisdiction; the applicant's recourse lies with the Court of Appeal.
- Citation
- [2026] KEHC 5236 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: David Cheruiyot; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Judgment Date
- 23 April 2026
- Case Number
- Criminal Miscellaneous Application E213 of 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Sentence Computation Under Section 333(2) CPC
- Outcome
- Application dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Computation of Sentence, Remand Period, Jurisdiction, Section 333(2) Criminal Procedure Code
- Source Language
- English
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
David Cheruiyot
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Sentence Computation Under Section 333(2) CPC
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to review sentence computation under Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code after an appeal has been determined
- 2 Whether the period spent in remand should be considered in computing the applicant's sentence
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court lacks jurisdiction to review or alter the sentence computation after an appeal has been determined by a court of concurrent jurisdiction; the applicant's recourse lies with the Court of Appeal.
Court Disposition
Application dismissed
Orders
- Application dated 11th November 2024 is hereby dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment