[2005] KEHC 2999 (KLR)
The court found that the sentences imposed on the appellant were neither harsh nor excessive, especially considering the deliberate and premeditated nature of the offences, which involved substantial sums of money and fraudulent conduct. The appellant's ill health, while unfortunate, did not constitute a sufficient...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2005] KEHC 2999 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: George Gitau Gakau; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 419 of 2003
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed; conviction and sentences upheld
- Legal Topics
- Making False Documents, Uttering False Documents, Obtaining by False Pretences, Sentencing Principles, Appeal on Sentence, Health as Mitigation
- 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
George Gitau Gakau
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentences imposed on the appellant were harsh or excessive.
- 2 Whether the appellant's ill health constitutes sufficient grounds for reduction of sentence.
- 3 Whether the conviction and sentences should be upheld on appeal.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the sentences imposed on the appellant were neither harsh nor excessive, especially considering the deliberate and premeditated nature of the offences, which involved substantial sums of money and fraudulent conduct. The appellant's ill health, while unfortunate, did not constitute a sufficient legal basis for reducing or interfering with a sentence that was otherwise lawful. Both the appellant and the respondent agreed that the sentences were not excessive. The court therefore dismissed the appeal and upheld both the conviction and the sentences imposed by the trial court.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed; conviction and sentences upheld
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed.
- The conviction and sentences imposed by the trial court are upheld.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
29 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 419 OF 2003
FROM ORIGINAL CONVICTION AND SENTENCE IN CRIMINAL CASE NO. 798 OF 2002 OF THE CHIEF MAGISTRATE’S COURT AT NAIROBI
GEORGE GITAU GAKAU………………………………APPELLANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC……………………………………………..RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
GEORGE GITAU GAKAUwas convicted on seven counts, and sentenced as follows:
1. Making a document without authority, contrary to section 357(a) of the Penal Code -18 months in jail.
2. Possession of a Kenya National Identity Card containing false entries, contrary to section 14(h) of the Registration of Persons Act – 18 months in jail.
3. Uttering a false document contrary to section 353 of the Penal code – 18 months in jail.
4. Obtaining money by false pretences – 2 ½ years in jail.
5. Obtaining money by false pretences, contrary to section 313 of the Penal Code – 2 ½ years in jail.
6. Obtaining money by false pretences, contrary to section 313 of the Penal Code – 2 ½ in jail.
7. Attempt to obtain money by false pretences, contrary to section 313 of the Penal code – 18 months in jail.
When passing sentence on the appellant, the learned trial Magistrate ordered that the sentences run concurrently. Therefore the appellant would spend no more than 2 ½ years in jail. But the appellant is still very dissatisfied with the sentence. In his appeal before me, the appellant pointed out that he was suffering from Tuberculosis and stomach ulcers. He also said that his eye-sight was also troubling him very seriously. He was therefore pleading with this court to set him free, so that he might be able to seek appropriate medical treatment.
In answer to the appellant’s submissions, the learned State Counsel, Mr. Makura pointed out that the offences in respect of which the appellant was charged involved substantial sums of money. By my calculations, the amount involved was in excess of Kshs. 580,000/=
The offences committed by the appellant did not just involve the relatively large sum cited above, it involved deliberate and conscious actions, intended to deceive. In other words, it is not the kind of offence which a person could commit instantaneously. In order to commit the offences, the appellant had to make an optimum Account Card. He then had to get an identification card whose particulars marched those of the person whose account he planned to raid. The appellant then presented himself to the bank and managed to withdraw a total of over Kshs 490,000/=.
On the fourth occasion, the appellant went to withdraw Kshs 98,702/=. PW5, Eunice Atieno Oiro, an employee of Barclays Bank of Kenya Limited suspected the identification card to be a fake. It is for that reason that she declined to pay money to the appellant, hence the offence in count 7, as set out at the beginning of this judgment.
I have set out the gist of the actions committed by the appellant, as it enables me to understand the kind of person that the appellant was. But he is now pleading with the court that he be set free. The learned State Counsel says that the sentences meted out to the appellant are not excessive or harsh. Interestingly the appellant is in agreement with the respondent, about the fact that the sentences are not harsh or excessive.
That being the case, what is the basis of the appellant’s request for a reduction of the sentences? He says that it is because he is unwell. I am afraid that the state of an appellant’s health is not normally a basis for interfering with a sentence which is otherwise lawful.
I also note that during his mitigation, the appellant did ask the learned trial magistrate to give him non-custodial sentence, so that he could continue receiving medical treatment. However, as the appellant had a previous conviction the trial court sentenced him to jail terms on each of the seven counts.
As both the appellant and the respondent agree that the sentences are not harsh or excessive, I find no reason to interfere with the same. Therefore, this appeal stands dismissed. The conviction and sentences are duly upheld.
Dated at Nairobi this 4th day of March 2005
FRED A. OCHIENG
JUDGE
Delivered in the presence of
For the State
Appellant in person present
Mr. Odero court clerk