[2017] KEHC 594 (KLR)
The court found that although the offence of grievous harm is serious, the sentence of 3 years imprisonment was already lenient. The appellant's status as a first offender, evidence of rehabilitation, and the non-aggravated nature of the injuries warranted consideration for a non-custodial sentence. However, before...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEHC 594 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Francis Kariuki Mbatia; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nyahururu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 116 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Interlocutory Judgment on Sentence Appeal
- Outcome
- Probation Officer's report called for before final decision on sentence.
- Judges
- RPV Wendoh
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Principles, Grievous Harm, Non Custodial Sentences
- 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
Francis Kariuki Mbatia
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Interlocutory Judgment on Sentence Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence of 3 years imprisonment for grievous harm was appropriate in the circumstances.
- 2 Whether the appellant should be considered for a non-custodial sentence given his personal circumstances.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that although the offence of grievous harm is serious, the sentence of 3 years imprisonment was already lenient. The appellant's status as a first offender, evidence of rehabilitation, and the non-aggravated nature of the injuries warranted consideration for a non-custodial sentence. However, before making a final determination, the court deemed it necessary to obtain a Probation Officer's report to assess the suitability of a non-custodial sentence for the appellant.
Court Disposition
Probation Officer's report called for before final decision on sentence.
Orders
- A Probation Officer's report shall be prepared to guide the court on whether to interfere with the sentence and consider a non-custodial sentence for the appellant.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NYAHURURU
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.116 OF 2017
(Appeal Originating from Nyahururu CM’s Court Cr.No.1268 of 2015 by: Hon. A.W. Mukenga – R.M.)
FRANCIS KARIUKI MBATIA..................APPELLANT
-V E R S U S –
REPUBLIC................................................RESPONDENT
J U D G M E N T
Francis Kariukiwas convicted for the offence of grievous harm contrary section 234 of the Penal Code by Hon. Mukenga R.M.
The particulars of the charge were that on 11/6/2013 at Site Estate in Ol Kalou District, Nyandarua City, unlawfully did grievous harm to Anastasia Wanjiku.
After a full trial, the appellant was sentenced to 3 years imprisonment. He has filed an appeal challenging both conviction and sentence. However, when he came to court, he intimated to the court that he only wished to proceed with the appeal against sentence. He informed the court that he has since transformed, he has acquired a certificate in Business and Carpentry; that he has served half the term and prays for a non custodial sentence for the balance of the sentence; that he left his family in a plot; the mother is old and he was a first offender.
The State did not oppose the appeal and left it to the court to decide.
I have considered that accused was a first offender. I note that though the offence committed was grievous harm, and the appellant was handed a prison sentence of only 3 years which in my view, was lenient. The appellant was sentenced on 22/7/2016, one year 3 months ago.
The injuries inflicted on the complainant were not aggravated in nature. For that reason, I will call for a Probation Officer’s report to guide this court on whether or not this court can interfere with the sentence and place the appellant on non custodial sentence.
Dated, Signed and Delivered at NYAHURURU this 17thday of November2017.
..........................
R.P.V. Wendoh
JUDGE
PRESENT:
…………… Prosecution Counsel
………………. - Court Assistant
Appellant – present
………………. -for appellant