Ogunda v Republic (Miscellaneous Criminal Application E106 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 8524 (KLR) (11 June 2026) (Ruling)

Ogunda v Republic (Miscellaneous Criminal Application E106 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 8524 (KLR) (11 June 2026) (Ruling)

The application was struck out because the High Court had no jurisdiction to revise the sentence or judgment of another judge of concurrent jurisdiction; doing so would amount to sitting on appeal over that judge’s decision.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2026] KEHC 8524 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: ISLAM JOSEPH ODHIAMBO OGUNDA; Respondent: Republic
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Criminal Application E106 of 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision Application / Ruling on Jurisdiction
Outcome
Application struck out for want of jurisdiction.
Judges
["PK Rotich"]
Legal Topics
Revision Jurisdiction, Section 333(1) Criminal Procedure Code, Set Off of Pre Sentence Custody Period, Probation/sentencing Mitigation, Concurrent Jurisdiction
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Criminal Procedure Sentencing Revision Jurisdiction Section 333(1) Criminal Procedure Code Set Off of Pre Sentence Custody Period Probation/sentencing Mitigation Concurrent Jurisdiction

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ISLAM JOSEPH ODHIAMBO OGUNDA

Applicant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Revision Application / Ruling on Jurisdiction

  1. 1 Whether the High Court had jurisdiction to revise a sentence imposed by a judge of concurrent jurisdiction
  2. 2 Whether the applicant was entitled to have pre-sentence custody period taken into account under section 333(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code
  3. 3 Whether the applicant should be placed on probation based on mitigation factors

Ratio Decidendi

The application was struck out because the High Court had no jurisdiction to revise the sentence or judgment of another judge of concurrent jurisdiction; doing so would amount to sitting on appeal over that judge’s decision.

Court Disposition

Application struck out for want of jurisdiction.

Orders

  • The revision application is struck out.
  • No further orders were made on the merits.