[2015] KEHC 7408 (KLR)
The High Court found that the trial magistrate erred in imposing a default imprisonment term of five years for non-payment of a fine of Kshs. 100,000, as Section 28(2) of the Penal Code limits such default terms to a maximum of 12 months. Since the appellant had already served more than 12 months, the continued...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] KEHC 7408 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Fredrick Muriithi Mugendi; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 280 of 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence
- Outcome
- appeal allowed; appellant released
- Judges
- AW Macharia
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Illegality, Preparation to Commit Felony, Penal Code Section 308, Penal Code Section 28, Default Sentence, Appeal Against Sentence
- 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 Muriithi Mugendi
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence imposed by the trial court was lawful under the Penal Code.
- 2 Whether the default imprisonment term for non-payment of fine exceeded the statutory maximum.
- 3 Whether the appellant should be released having served more than the lawful default term.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court found that the trial magistrate erred in imposing a default imprisonment term of five years for non-payment of a fine of Kshs. 100,000, as Section 28(2) of the Penal Code limits such default terms to a maximum of 12 months. Since the appellant had already served more than 12 months, the continued imprisonment was unlawful. The court determined that the appellant should be released forthwith, as the sentence imposed was illegal and he had served in excess of the lawful default term.
Court Disposition
appeal allowed; appellant released
Orders
- The appeal succeeds.
- The appellant is forthwith set free.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CRIMINAL DIVISION
HIGH COURT CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 280 OF 2012
FREDRICK MURIITHI MUGENDI…………………….….APPELLANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC ……………………………………………….RESPONDENT
(Being an appeal from the judgment of the Hon. B. N. Nzakyo (Senior Resident Magistrate)
inGithunguriPrincipal Magistrate’s Criminal Case No.1082 of 2011 delivered on2ndNovember, 2012)
JUDGEMENT
Fredrick MuriithiMugendi was charged with preparation to commit a felony contrary to section 308 (3)(b) of the Penal Code. It was alleged that on the 28th day of August 2011 at 3 a.m. at Diplomat House in Githunguri Township in Kiambu County within Central Province was found in a building namely a dwelling house of Winfred Maina Wanjiru at night with intent to commit a felony therein.He was found guilty convicted and sentenced to pay a fine of Kshs.100,000/- in default serve five years imprisonment. He was unable to raise the fine and since the date of the sentence, that is 2nd November 2012, has been serving his imprisonment term.
Under grounds of appeal filed on the 9th of November 2012 he appealed both against the conviction and sentence. But at the hearing of the appeal he submitted that he shall only be appealing against the sentence. He submitted that he has served three years and during the period of imprisonment has trained and attained a grade I both in carpentry and upholstery. He also stated that his mother died while he was in prison and that he is a married man with two children who are currently taken care of by his aunt because his wife is jobless.
Learned state counsel M/s Nyaucho, submitted that although the appellant was sentenced to five years imprisonment he appeared remorseful and since he had served a substantial part of it she did not oppose the appeal.
Having heard the respective submissions and having noted that the appellant does not dispute the length of the sentence it is my view that it would serve more good than harm if the appellant were set free so that he can go and engage in gainful employment. However, it is important to note that under section 304 (3)(b) of the Penal Code any person who is convicted for the offence of preparations to commit a felony upon conviction is liable to imprisonment with hard labour for five years and if he has previously been convicted of a felony relating to property to such imprisonment for 10 years. The learned trial magistrate having chosen the path to impose a penalty of a fine ought to have beenguided by Section 28 of the Penal Code. The fine imposed was that of Kshs.100,000/- (One Hundred Thousand), which was subject toSection 28 (2). Hence, the default term ought not to have exceeded 12 months imprisonment. In that respect, it follows that the sentence imposed was illegal. The appellant ought to be set free forthwith having already served in excess of the 12 months.
The upshot of my observation is that this appeal succeeds and the appellant is forthwith set free.
DATED and DELIVERD at NAIROBI this 8thday of June2015.
G. W. NGENYE – MACHARIA
JUDGE
In the Presence of:
1. The appellant in person.
2. M/s Nyauncho,for the respondent.