[2025] KEHC 5314 (KLR)

[2025] KEHC 5314 (KLR)

The court found that the trial court failed to comply with the mandatory requirement under section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code to consider the period the applicant spent in remand custody before sentencing. The applicant was arrested on 22nd February 2023 and remained in custody until conviction and sentencing, but this period was not credited against his three-year sentence. The court held that failure to account for this period would amount to a denial of the applicant's statutory right and an abdication of the court's legal obligation. Accordingly, the sentence was ordered to run from the date of arrest, ensuring compliance with the law and upholding the applicant's rights.

Citation
[2025] KEHC 5314 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Moses Fadhili; Respondent: Republic
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kibera
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
29 April 2025
Case Number
Criminal Revision E033 of 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Sentence Review
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
DR Kavedza
Legal Topics
Sentencing Review, Remand Custody Credit, Penal Code Section 275, Criminal Procedure Code Section 333 2
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Sentencing Review Remand Custody Credit Penal Code Section 275 Criminal Procedure Code Section 333 2

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Moses Fadhili

Applicant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Revision / Ruling on Sentence Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial court erred by failing to consider the time the applicant spent in remand custody when computing the sentence.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to have the sentence reviewed to account for time spent in custody.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the trial court failed to comply with the mandatory requirement under section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code to consider the period the applicant spent in remand custody before sentencing. The applicant was arrested on 22nd February 2023 and remained in custody until conviction and sentencing, but this period was not credited against his three-year sentence. The court held that failure to account for this period would amount to a denial of the applicant's statutory right and an abdication of the court's legal obligation. Accordingly, the sentence was ordered to run from the date of arrest, ensuring compliance with the law and upholding the applicant's rights.

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • The sentence of three years imprisonment imposed by the trial court shall run from 22nd February 2023, the date of the applicant’s arrest, pursuant to section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.