[2025] KEHC 8645 (KLR)

[2025] KEHC 8645 (KLR)

The court found that the Petitioner only spent approximately 2 months in remand custody, not the 5 years and 7 months claimed. The trial court was required by Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code to take this period into account in sentencing, but failed to do so. The court ordered that the 2 months spent in remand custody be subtracted from the 7-year sentence imposed. Further, since the Petitioner was serving a separate sentence of 5 years for a different conviction, Section 37 of the Penal Code mandates that the 7-year sentence in the present case is to commence only after the completion of the earlier 5-year sentence, as there was no direction for the sentences to run...

Citation
[2025] KEHC 8645 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Daniel Gumo; Respondent: Republic
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Eldoret
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
20 June 2025
Case Number
Criminal Petition E012 of 2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal Petition / Judgment
Outcome
petition allowed in part
Judges
JRA Wananda
Legal Topics
Sentencing Guidelines, Remand Custody Credit, Concurrent and Consecutive Sentences, Resentencing Applications
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Sentencing Guidelines Remand Custody Credit Concurrent and Consecutive Sentences Resentencing Applications

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daniel Gumo

Applicant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Petition / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the period spent by the Petitioner in remand custody before sentencing should be deducted from the prison term imposed.
  2. 2 Whether the sentence in the present case should take effect only after the expiration of an earlier sentence imposed in a separate criminal case.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Petitioner only spent approximately 2 months in remand custody, not the 5 years and 7 months claimed. The trial court was required by Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code to take this period into account in sentencing, but failed to do so. The court ordered that the 2 months spent in remand custody be subtracted from the 7-year sentence imposed. Further, since the Petitioner was serving a separate sentence of 5 years for a different conviction, Section 37 of the Penal Code mandates that the 7-year sentence in the present case is to commence only after the completion of the earlier 5-year sentence, as there was no direction for the sentences to run...

Court Disposition

petition allowed in part

Orders

  • The period spent in remand custody between 26/05/2017 and 27/07/2017 shall be subtracted from the 7-year sentence imposed on 18/01/2023.
  • The 7-year sentence shall commence only after the expiry of the earlier 5-year sentence imposed in Eldoret Chief Magistrate’s Court Criminal Case No. 150 of 2020.