[2014] KEHC 3613 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant was convicted of forgery involving a title deed, a document of title to land, which under Section 350(1) of the Penal Code attracts a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. The trial magistrate had imposed a three-year custodial sentence, which the court considered lenient given...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] KEHC 3613 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Edward Kimiti Mungai; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nyeri
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision 81 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Application for Revision of Sentence
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Principles, Forgery Offences, Penal Code Interpretation
- 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
Edward Kimiti Mungai
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Application for Revision of Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant's custodial sentence should be substituted with a non-custodial sentence due to age and family circumstances.
- 2 Whether the sentence imposed was appropriate given the nature of the offence and the applicable law.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant was convicted of forgery involving a title deed, a document of title to land, which under Section 350(1) of the Penal Code attracts a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. The trial magistrate had imposed a three-year custodial sentence, which the court considered lenient given the seriousness of the offence and the unrecovered sum of Ksh. 1,050,000/-. The applicant's age and family circumstances, while sympathetic, did not outweigh the need for deterrent punishment in cases of serious economic crime. Consequently, the court declined to interfere with the sentence imposed by the trial court.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application for substitution of the custodial sentence with a non-custodial sentence is declined.
- The sentence of three years imprisonment imposed by the trial court is upheld.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
17 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NYERI
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO. 81 OF 2013
EDWARD KIMITI MUNGAI..............................................APPLICANT
versus
REPUBLIC..................................................................RESPONDENT
REVISION
1. By an application under certificate of urgency received on 23rd September 2013 the applicant moved this court for an order that his sentence be substituted with a non custodial sentence under CSO on the basis that he is an old man aged 65 years and the only family bread winner.
2. In his supporting affidavit the applicant deponed that he was sentenced to three years on 30th October 2012 and that he is an old man aged 70 years with the family he left behind undergoing untold suffering.
3. The applicant was charged with the offence of forgery contrary to section 348 of the Penal Code the particulars of which were that on unknown date and place within the Republic of Kenya, jointly with others not before the court forged certain documents namely title deed LR No. RUIRU/BLOCK/2642 Githunguri purporting to be a genuine document issued to Joshua Wanjama Kimani by the Lands Registrar Kiambu.
4. He was convicted of the offence and in sentencing him to three years the trial magistrate had this to say.
“The offence committed are serious the complainants money amounting to Ksh. 1,050,000/- has since not been recovered nd the seriousness of the offences call for deterrent punishment which punishment will serve as a lesson not only to the accused person but to the other would be offenders.
5. I have further noted that the applicant should have been charged under section 350(1) of the Penal Code which carries imprisonment for life since the document forged was a title deed which is a documents of title to land and therefore find that the applicant was given a very lenient sentence in the circumstances and therefore decline to interferer with the same the age of the applicant not withstanding.
Dated and delivered at Nyeri this 31st day of July 2014.
J. WAKIAGA
JUDGE