[2019] KEHC 858 (KLR)
The court held that, although the Supreme Court decision in Francis Muruatetu removed the mandatory nature of the death sentence and required courts to exercise discretion considering various mitigating factors, the circumstances of this case—including the premeditated nature of the offence and the manner in which...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEHC 858 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Freda Kanui Musa Alias Frida Karugu; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Petition 150 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Resentencing / Ruling on Resentencing Petition
- Outcome
- petition dismissed
- Judges
- A Mabeya
- Legal Topics
- Murder Sentencing, Mandatory Sentencing, Judicial Discretion, Mitigation Factors, Life Imprisonment
- 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
Freda Kanui Musa Alias Frida Karugu
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Resentencing / Ruling on Resentencing Petition
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the mandatory life sentence imposed on the petitioner should be reviewed in light of the Supreme Court decision in Francis Muruatetu and Others vs Republic [2017] eKLR.
- 2 Whether the circumstances of the offence and mitigation warrant a reduction of the sentence.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that, although the Supreme Court decision in Francis Muruatetu removed the mandatory nature of the death sentence and required courts to exercise discretion considering various mitigating factors, the circumstances of this case—including the premeditated nature of the offence and the manner in which it was committed—did not warrant interference with the life sentence imposed by the Court of Appeal. The petitioner's mitigation and status as a first offender were considered, but the gravity and planning of the offence outweighed these factors. Therefore, the life sentence was upheld.
Court Disposition
petition dismissed
Orders
- The petition for resentencing is dismissed.
- The life sentence imposed by the Court of Appeal remains in force.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
17 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU
PETITION NO. 150 OF 2018
FREDA KANUI MUSA Alias FRIDA KARUGU..............................PETITIONER
VERSUS
REPUBLIC........................................................................................RESPONDENT
RULING ON RE-SENTENSING
1. The petitioner, Freda Kanui Musa Alias Frida Karugu was charged with murder contrary to section 203 as read with section 204 of the Penal Code. The information charged that on 25/12/2006, at Munithu Location of the then Meru Central District within the present Meru County, she murdered Mercy Kagwiria.
2. After trial, the petitioner was found guilty and sentenced to death. Being aggrieved by that decision, she appealed to the Court of Appeal which appeal was dismissed on 26/2/2015. However, the Court of Appeal set aside the death sentence and sentenced the petitioner to life imprisonment.
3. Vide her Petition filed on 17/7/2018, she petitioned this Court to review her sentence on the basis of the Supreme Court decision in the case of Francis Muruatetu and Others vs Republic [2017] eKLR.
4. In that case, the Supreme Court of Kenya held that the mandatory nature of the death sentence was unconstitutional as it denied the Court its discretion in sentencing. The Court proceeded to set out the criteria or the principles that should guide a Court in sentencing. Some of the considerations are age of the offender, being a first offender, whether the offender pleaded guilty, the character and record of the offender, commission of the offence in response to gender-based violence, remorsefulness of the offender, the possibility of reform and social re-adaptation of the offender and any other factor that the Court considers relevant.
5. I have considered the foregoing and the circumstances under which the offence was committed. The petitioner stabbed the deceased with a knife on that fateful Christmas day when the deceased had come home to visit her child. The petitioner had hid the knife in her waist before she accosted the deceased. She had really pre-meditated her act.
6. The state urged that a sentence of 50 years be meted out to the petitioner although she is a first offender. In her mitigation, the petitioner stated that she committed the offence without knowing and she asked for forgiveness.
7. Taking into consideration the facts of the case and how the petitioner committed the offence as well as the mitigation, I see no reason to interfere with the life sentence meted out on her by the Court of Appeal. The petition is hereby dismissed.
DATEDand DELIVEREDat Meru this 11th day of December, 2019.
A. MABEYA
JUDGE