[2013] KEHC 3932 (KLR)
The court found that the evidence of PW2, corroborated by the complainant, established beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant willfully and unlawfully set fire to his father's house. The appellant's defense that explosives caused the fire was rejected as no explosives were found at the scene and the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2013] KEHC 3932 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: David Mutiso Mutunga; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Mombasa
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 127 of 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Judges
- GO Shikwe
- Legal Topics
- Arson, Criminal Sentencing, Evidence Evaluation
- 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 Mutiso Mutunga
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the conviction for arson was supported by the evidence adduced at the trial court.
- 2 Whether the sentence of seven years imprisonment was harsh or excessive.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the evidence of PW2, corroborated by the complainant, established beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant willfully and unlawfully set fire to his father's house. The appellant's defense that explosives caused the fire was rejected as no explosives were found at the scene and the investigating officer's findings supported the prosecution's case. The court held that the conviction was safe and the sentence of seven years imprisonment was neither harsh nor excessive, considering the appellant was not a first offender and the maximum sentence for arson is life imprisonment.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- The appeal against conviction and sentence is disallowed.
- The conviction and sentence of seven years imprisonment are upheld.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
26 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
High Court at Mombasa
Criminal Appeal 127 of 2011 [if gte mso 9]><xml>
800x600
</xml><![endif]
(From Original Conviction and Sentence in Criminal Case No. 117 of 2011 of the Senior Resident Magistrate’s Court at Taveta – C. N. Ndegwa (SRM))
DAVID MUTISO MUTUNGA ………………………….…. APPELLANT
- Versus -
REPUBLIC ………………………..………………….… RESPONDENT
JUDGEMENT
Upon conviction for the offence of Arson contrary to Section 332(a) of the Penal Code, the Appellant was sentenced to seven years imprisonment.
The particulars of the charge are that on the 23rd day of March 2011 at Chachewa Village, Taita Taveta County he willfully and unlawfully set fire to a building namely a dwelling house, the property of John Mutunga.
The grounds of appeal are mainly based on the evidence adduced at the lower Court. It is the Appellant’s contention that he did not set his father’s house on fire but the presence of explosive devices therein caused the fire as they lacked safety pins.
PW2 is the prosecution witness. This is what he told the lower Court-
“On 23rd March 2011 at 4. 30pm I was at my house when the Accused who is a son to the complainant went and broke into his father’s house. He then entered into the house. He stayed inside for three minutes then came outside. I called the father and told him of what had happened. The father came and quarreled with the Accused after the Accused told him that he would kill him. The father left to call police. The Accused entered into the house and drained paraffin from a lantern lamp into a bottle of soda. He then said that he would burn the house. I called the father and told him what Accused had said. The Accused lit fire from inside the sitting room and told me and the other tenants that we can call the father and tell him that he had burnt the house. We struggled to put off the fire. I called the father and told him that the Accused had put his house on fire.”
The evidence of this witness (PW2) was corroborated by the father of the Appellant. His evidence is very graphic as to what the Appellant did. PW2 was a tenant of PW1 and clearly said what the Appellant was doing. He had seen him pour paraffin out of lantern lamp and put it into a bottle of soda and told everybody who would care that he was going to set the house on fire. His defence is that the fire was caused by some explosives which his father had sent him to buy at Arusha – Tanzania and which lacked safety devices.
The same had been stored inside his father’s house before erupting. The investigating officer who visited the scene and collected the burnt exhibits found no explosives. The Defence by the Appellant does not hold much water. The Appellant was clearly seen by PW2 setting his fathers house on fire and later running away. It is evident that there was misunderstanding between the Accused and his father. The father told the Court that the Appellant had run away from school while in Form II. He had previously stolen his motorbike and escaped to Lamu.
I am satisfied that the conviction for the offence of Arson was safe. The Appellants willfully and unlawfully set on fire his fathers house. The offence attracts a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.
The Appellant was sentenced to seven years imprisonment. He is not a first offender. The sentence of seven years imprisonment is not harsh nor is it excessive. The Appeal has no merit and is disallowed both on conviction and sentence.
Judgment read and delivered in open Court this 25th day of April, 2013.
M. MUYA
JUDGE
In the presence of:-
Mr. Dzumo for the State
Appellant - present
Court clerk – Mr. Musundi