[2021] KEHC 5151 (KLR)
The court found that the gravity of the offence, the severe and lasting impact on the victim, and the unaddressed anger of the appellant warranted a custodial sentence. The court determined that a non-custodial or lenient sentence would not serve the interests of justice, as it would further harm the victim and fail...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEHC 5151 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Dinah Mbaah; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision 151 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision Application / Sentencing Ruling
- Outcome
- appellant sentenced to fifteen years imprisonment; period in custody considered; right of appeal explained
- Judges
- GL Nzioka
- Legal Topics
- Grievous Harm, Sentencing Principles, Victim Impact, Rehabilitation, Deterrence
- 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
Dinah Mbaah
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision Application / Sentencing Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence imposed on the appellant for grievous harm is appropriate in light of the circumstances.
- 2 Whether a non-custodial or lenient sentence would serve the interests of justice given the impact on the victim.
- 3 Whether the period already served in custody should be considered in sentencing.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the gravity of the offence, the severe and lasting impact on the victim, and the unaddressed anger of the appellant warranted a custodial sentence. The court determined that a non-custodial or lenient sentence would not serve the interests of justice, as it would further harm the victim and fail to deter similar conduct. The period already served in custody and on trial was considered and factored into the final sentence. The court imposed a custodial sentence of fifteen years, effective from the date of pronouncement, to serve both rehabilitative and deterrent purposes.
Court Disposition
appellant sentenced to fifteen years imprisonment; period in custody considered; right of appeal explained
Orders
- The appellant is sentenced to serve a custodial sentence of fifteen (15) years.
- The sentence takes effect from 28th June 2021.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NAIROBI
CRIMINAL DIVISION AT MILIMANI
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 151 OF 2019
DINAH MBAAH..............APPELLANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC...................RESPONDENT
RULING ON SENTENCE
1. Pursuant to the judgment delivered herein on 24th May 2017 confirming the conviction of the appellant on the charge of;grievous harm contrary to; section 234 of the penal code, the court ordered for a pre-sentence report.
2. Upon receipt of the said report and I note from the contents thereof that, as much as the appellant’s plight is well detailed therein, indicating her remorse for the offence and the desire of her family members to have her reintegrated back into the society, the plight of the victim speaks volume.
3. The report expressly shows that the victim is helpless and has lost hope in life. The damage caused to her as a result of; the injuries inflicted on her by the appellant, has had a heavy psychological, emotional, social and financial far reaching impact, on her. Put simply that; “she has lost hope” in life.
4. The court appreciates the fact that, no amount of punishment,however severe, can remedy the victim’s situation. However, a non-custodial sentence and/or an otherwise lenient sentence will break the victim little hope in life (if any) put it otherwise the “camel’s back”. She will be left destitute in search for justice.
5. Similarly, the kind of anger visited upon the victim by the appellant while assaulting her, speaks for itself. It will not be safe to release her back to the society, when that anger has not been managed. Therefore, the sentence pronounced herein should serve both rehabilitative and deterrence purposes.
6. Having considered the period, the appellant was on trial of approximately one and a half (1 ½) years, and the period she has been in custody for about four years, I sentence her to serve acustodial sentence of fifteen (15) years. This period has already taken into account, the period in custody and the sentence so far served. Therefore, it will take effect from the date of pronouncement thereof, the 28th June 2021. It is so ordered.
Right of appeal fourteen (14) days explained.
DATED, DELIVERED VIRTUALLY, AND SIGNED ON THIS 28THDAY OF JUNE, 2021
GRACE L NZIOKA
JUDGE
In the presence of;
Mr Rutto for the appellant
Ms Ndombi for the Respondent
Edwin Court Assistant