https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/11579
The applicant remained in remand throughout trial and the trial court failed to reckon with the period already spent in custody despite the mandatory requirement of section 333(2) CPC. That omission was an outright error correctable on revision, so the sentence had to be backdated to the date of arrest.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2026] KEHC 11579 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: FREDRICK JUMA; Respondent: REPUBLIC
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision E077 of 2025
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Sentence Computation Under Section 333(2) CPC
- Outcome
- Application allowed on revision.
- Judges
- ["PJO Otieno"]
- Legal Topics
- Revision, Sentencing, Pre Sentence Custody Credit, Section 333(2) Criminal Procedure Code, Attempted Murder
- 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
FREDRICK JUMA
Applicant
REPUBLIC
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Sentence Computation Under Section 333(2) CPC
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant was entitled to credit for time spent in custody before sentencing under section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
- 2 Whether the trial court erred by failing to compute the sentence from the date of arrest/remand.
- 3 Whether the error was correctable on revision.
Ratio Decidendi
The applicant remained in remand throughout trial and the trial court failed to reckon with the period already spent in custody despite the mandatory requirement of section 333(2) CPC. That omission was an outright error correctable on revision, so the sentence had to be backdated to the date of arrest.
Court Disposition
Application allowed on revision.
Orders
- The sentence imposed in Homa Bay CMCCR Case No. E0253 of 2024 shall be deemed to have commenced on 19.11.2024.
- The applicant is to receive credit for the period spent in custody prior to sentence.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
**REPUBLIC OF KENYA** **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT HOMA BAY** **CRIMINAL REVISION ION NO. E077 OF 2025** **FREDRICK JUMA………….…….…………….……..……..…..…………....…….…..APPLICANT** **VERSUS** **REPUBLIC…………………………….……………………………..........….………..RESPONDENT** **(Arising from the conviction and sentence in Homa Bay CMCCR case No. E0253 of 2024)** **RULING** 1. Before the Court is the Applicant's undated Notice of Motion seeking to be accorded the statutory benefit conferred under Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) by having the period spent in custody prior to the imposition of sentence taken into account in computing his sentence. 2. The application arises from the Applicant's conviction by the trial court. He was initially charged with the offence of attempted murder contrary to Section 220 of the Penal Code. Upon conclusion of the trial, and conviction, he was sentenced to serve ten (10) years' imprisonment. 3. He was aggrieved by both the conviction and the sentence, thus preferred applied for leave to file an appeal out of time but there was delay in determining that application for leave hence when the parties appeared in court on the 13.07.20266, he sought to withdraw that application and the court acceded to his request. 4. The conviction remains and the applicant how beseeches the court that he gets the statutory benefit conferred by section 333(2). He asserts that the trial court denied him the benefit and therefore prays that his term of imprisonment be ordered to commence and be computed from the date of his arrest, 19.11.2024. 5. The court has perused the record at trial and established that the applicant was never granted bail nor was he released pending trial. He is determined to have remained in remand throughout the trial. The court has further established that the sentence failed to reckon with the time spent in custody contrary to the requirement of the law. 6. That is an outright error this court is mandated to correct on revision. The error is thus corrected with an order that the sentence the applicant serves shall be computed to have commenced on the 19.11.2024, the day he was apprehended and placed into custody 7. It is so ordered. Dated, signed and delivered at Lodwar this 27th day of July 2026 Patrick J O Otieno Judge