[2022] KEHC 2926 (KLR)
The High Court determined that the Supreme Court's decision in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic [2017] eKLR, as clarified in the 2021 directions, is strictly limited to mandatory sentences for murder under section 204 of the Penal Code. Since the applicant was convicted of robbery with violence under...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEHC 2926 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Domenic Muruli Wefila; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kakamega
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Petition 89 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Petition / Ruling on Jurisdiction and Application of Supreme Court Precedent
- Outcome
- petition and application dismissed for want of jurisdiction
- Judges
- DN Musyoka
- Legal Topics
- Mandatory Sentencing, Jurisdiction of High Court, Robbery With Violence, Sentence Review
- 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
Domenic Muruli Wefila
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Petition / Ruling on Jurisdiction and Application of Supreme Court Precedent
Legal Issues
- 1 Does the Supreme Court decision in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic [2017] eKLR apply to mandatory sentences for robbery with violence under section 296(2) of the Penal Code?
- 2 Does the High Court have jurisdiction to review the applicant's sentence in light of the Supreme Court's clarification?
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court determined that the Supreme Court's decision in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic [2017] eKLR, as clarified in the 2021 directions, is strictly limited to mandatory sentences for murder under section 204 of the Penal Code. Since the applicant was convicted of robbery with violence under section 296(2) of the Penal Code, the precedent does not apply. Consequently, the High Court lacks jurisdiction to review or alter the sentence imposed by the trial court. The petition and application for resentencing are therefore incompetent and must be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Court Disposition
petition and application dismissed for want of jurisdiction
Orders
- The petition and application are dismissed as incompetent.
- The Deputy Registrar shall cause copies of this ruling to be availed to the petitioner and the office of Director of Public Prosecutions, Kakamega.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
14 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KAKAMEGA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 89 OF 2019
DOMENIC MURULI WEFILA............................................................APPLICANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC..........................................................................................RESPONDENT
RULING
1. This matter was placed before me for the purpose of giving directions, in view of the recent decision by the Supreme Court in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic; Katiba Institute & 5 others(Amicus Curiae[2021] (Koome CJ&P, Mwilu DCJ&VP, Ibrahim, Wanjala, Ndung’u & Lenaola SSJJ), with respect to mandatory sentences, where it was clarified that the decision, in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic[2017] eKLR (Maraga CJ&P, Mwilu DCJ&VP, Ojwang, Wanjala, Njoki and Lenaola SCJJ), had arisen from proceedings relating to murder, under section 204 of the Penal Code, Cap 63, Laws of Kenya, and the position stated in the said decision was intended to apply only to mandatory sentences with respect to murder cases.
2. The petition herein, undated, was filed herein on 22nd November 2019, is principally founded on the decision, in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic[2017] eKLR (Maraga CJ&P, Mwilu DCJ&VP, Ojwang, Wanjala, Njoki and Lenaola SCJJ), for the applicant seeks review of his sentence, where he had been convicted of robbery with violence, contrary to section 296(2) of the Penal Code, in Kakamega CMCRCRC No. 2126 of 2008, and was sentenced to death. He appealed in Kakamega HCCRC No. 27 of 2011, which was dismissed and the sentence upheld. He alludes to filing another appeal at the Court of Appeal at Kisumu, which was also dismissed.
3. The offence, the subject of the instant proceedings, is not murder, but robbery with violence, as defined in Section 296(2) of the Penal Code, the decision in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic[2017] eKLR (Maraga CJ&P, Mwilu DCJ&VP, Ojwang, Wanjala, Njoki and Lenaola SCJJ), therefore, does not apply to it. As a consequence, the High Court has no jurisdiction to review the sentence that was imposed by the trial court, in view of the directions given in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic; Katiba Institute & 5 others(Amicus Curiae[2021] (Koome CJ&P, Mwilu DCJ&VP, Ibrahim, Wanjala, Ndung’u & Lenaola SSJJ). The application and petition are incompetent.
4. The Deputy Registrar shall cause copies of this ruling to be availed to the petitioner and the office of Director of Public Prosecutions, Kakamega.
PREPARED, DATED AND SIGNED AT KAKAMEGA THIS 14TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2022
W MUSYOKA
JUDGE