[2019] KEHC 376 (KLR)

[2019] KEHC 376 (KLR)

The court found that the Applicant was convicted of possession of 711 grams of cannabis sativa valued at Kshs. 5,333/=. Both the Applicant and the 2nd Accused had favourable probation reports, yet the Applicant received a custodial sentence while the 2nd Accused was placed on probation. The court held that the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEHC 376 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Destrious Kisikwa; Respondent: Republic
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Criminal Appeal 154 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Ruling on Sentence and Release
Outcome
application allowed; sentence reviewed; applicant released
Legal Topics
Narcotic Drugs Possession, Sentencing Disparity, Probation Reports, Custodial Sentence, Quantity of Drugs, Judicial Discretion
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Narcotic Drugs Possession Sentencing Disparity Probation Reports Custodial Sentence Quantity of Drugs Judicial Discretion

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Destrious Kisikwa

Applicant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Ruling on Sentence and Release

  1. 1 Whether the sentence imposed on the Applicant was proportionate to the offence and circumstances.
  2. 2 Whether the trial court erred in imposing varied sentences on co-accused with similar probation reports.
  3. 3 Whether the period already served by the Applicant was sufficient punishment.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Applicant was convicted of possession of 711 grams of cannabis sativa valued at Kshs. 5,333/=. Both the Applicant and the 2nd Accused had favourable probation reports, yet the Applicant received a custodial sentence while the 2nd Accused was placed on probation. The court held that the disparity in sentencing was not justified by the law or the facts, and that the period of two years and nearly four months already served by the Applicant was sufficient punishment. The remainder of the sentence was set aside, and the Applicant was ordered to be released unless otherwise lawfully held.

Court Disposition

application allowed; sentence reviewed; applicant released

Orders

  • The remainder of the Applicant's sentence is set aside.
  • The period of 2 years and close to 4 months already served is deemed sufficient sentence.