[2021] KEHC 3870 (KLR)

[2021] KEHC 3870 (KLR)

The High Court found that, although the appellant was convicted of cheating and obtained KES 523,730 by fraudulent means, the offence was a misdemeanor and the appellant had already spent approximately six months in custody. The court determined that the circumstances justified a non-custodial sentence. The sentence...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KEHC 3870 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Elikah Nasimiyu Bunyasi; Respondent: Republic
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Bungoma
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Criminal Appeal E043 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal_allowed
Legal Topics
Cheating Offence, Sentencing Principles, Compensation Orders, Misdemeanour Classification
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Cheating Offence Sentencing Principles Compensation Orders Misdemeanour Classification

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Elikah Nasimiyu Bunyasi

Appellant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the custodial sentence imposed by the trial court was appropriate for the offence of cheating under section 315 of the Penal Code.
  2. 2 Whether a non-custodial sentence and compensation order were suitable in the circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court found that, although the appellant was convicted of cheating and obtained KES 523,730 by fraudulent means, the offence was a misdemeanor and the appellant had already spent approximately six months in custody. The court determined that the circumstances justified a non-custodial sentence. The sentence of two years’ imprisonment was quashed and replaced with a fine of KES 60,000, with a default sentence of 12 months’ imprisonment. Additionally, if the fine is paid, KES 50,000 is to be paid to the complainant as compensation, as the loss was readily ascertainable and the case fit the criteria for a compensation order under section 24(c) of the Penal Code and the principles in...

Court Disposition

appeal_allowed

Orders

  • The sentence of two years’ imprisonment imposed by the trial court is quashed.
  • The appellant is sentenced to pay a fine of KES 60,000, in default to serve 12 months’ imprisonment.