https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/10453
The trial court did not indicate that it had considered the period the applicant spent in custody before sentencing, yet section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code is mandatory; therefore, the applicant was entitled to have the custody period deducted from the 20-year sentence.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2026] KEHC 10453 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: DAVID KIDADA YAKO; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision E006 of 2026
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling on Sentence Computation/application Under Section 333(2) CPC
- Outcome
- Application allowed
- Judges
- ["JN Njagi"]
- Legal Topics
- Defilement Sentence, Custody Period Deduction, Section 333(2) Criminal Procedure Code, Revision of 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
DAVID KIDADA YAKO
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Sentence Computation/application Under Section 333(2) CPC
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the period spent in custody before sentencing should be deducted from the applicant's 20-year sentence.
- 2 Whether the trial court complied with section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Ratio Decidendi
The trial court did not indicate that it had considered the period the applicant spent in custody before sentencing, yet section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code is mandatory; therefore, the applicant was entitled to have the custody period deducted from the 20-year sentence.
Court Disposition
Application allowed
Orders
- The period between 25th February 2017 and 5th October 2017 shall be computed from the applicant's 20-year sentence.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
**REPUBLIC OF KENYA** **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT GARSEN** **CRIMINAL REV. NO. E006 OF 2026** **DAVID KIDADA YAKO……..…….……………………. APPLICANT** **VERSUS** **REPUBLIC…………………………………..…..………..RESPONDENT** **RULING** 1. The Applicant has filed an undated application seeking for orders for this court to consider the time spent in custody of three months in his sentence of 20 years. 2. The application is based on the grounds that the applicant was sentenced to serve 20 years imprisonment for an offence of defilement. That he was remanded in custody on 24/2/2017 and was sentenced on 5/10/2017. 3. The application is made pursuant to the provisions of Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code which requires a court when sentencing an accused person who has been in custody awaiting trial to take into account such period when passing sentence. 4. I have perused the record of the trial court. The same shows that the Applicant was arrested on 25/2/2017 and was sentenced on 5th October 2017. He was in custody during the trial. The trial court when passing the sentence did not indicate whether it had taken into account the period spent in custody. 5. The provisions of Section 333(2) are mandatory. In the instant case the trial magistrate did not comply with the provisions of the section. I thereby find the application by the Applicant to be merited. 6. In view of the foregoing, I order that the period between 25th February 2017 and 5th October 2017 be computed from the 20 years sentence meted on the applicant. 7. Orders accordingly. **Delivered, dated and signed at GARSEN this 10th day of July 2026.** **J. N. NJAGI** **JUDGE** **In the presence of:** **Mr. Oluoch for Respondent** **Applicant: Present virtually at G.K. Prison Malindi** Court Assistant: Farhan