[2014] KEHC 6654 (KLR)
The court found that the sentences imposed by the trial court were lawful and in accordance with the mandatory provisions of the Traffic Act and its Amendment Rules. The applicant pleaded guilty, the facts were confirmed, and the law prescribes minimum and maximum penalties for the offences. Section 348 of the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] KEHC 6654 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: James Lupu Luchungure; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision 5 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Judgment
- Outcome
- Application for revision of sentence dismissed; sentence of the lower court upheld.
- Judges
- MJA Emukule
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Principles, Traffic Offences, Plea of Guilty
- 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
James Lupu Luchungure
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence imposed by the trial court was lawful and appropriate under the Traffic Act and related rules.
- 2 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to interfere with the sentence following a plea of guilty.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the sentences imposed by the trial court were lawful and in accordance with the mandatory provisions of the Traffic Act and its Amendment Rules. The applicant pleaded guilty, the facts were confirmed, and the law prescribes minimum and maximum penalties for the offences. Section 348 of the Criminal Procedure Code restricts the court's ability to interfere with such sentences except on the question of legality or extent, neither of which was violated in this case. Therefore, the court declined to set aside or substitute the sentence but directed the Probation Officer to investigate and make recommendations regarding the treatment of similar offenders.
Court Disposition
Application for revision of sentence dismissed; sentence of the lower court upheld.
Orders
- The application for revision is dismissed.
- The sentence imposed by the lower court is upheld.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
18 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAKURU
CRIMINAL REVISION NO. 5 OF 2014
JAMES LUPU LUCHUNGURE............................................................APPLICANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC........................................................................................RESPONDENT
REVISION
James Lupu Luchungure has cried out for mercy in his letter of 10th February 2014 and have his sentence of a fine of Kshs 10,000/= or in default three months imprisonment set aside and substituted by a non-custodial sentence.
The Applicant was convicted on his own plea of guilty to two counts -
Count I- failing to wear a helmet and reflecting jacket contrary to rule 25A(1) and (8) of the Traffic (Amendment) Rules 2009 (made under the Traffic Act, Cap. 403 of the Laws of Kenya).
Count II– the Riding a motor cycle on a public road without a driving licence contrary to Rule 25A(6) & (8) of the Traffic Amendment Rules 2009 (made under the Traffic Act Cap. 403, Laws of Kenya).
The punishment under Count I is a minimum of ten thousand shillings and a maximum of fifteen thousand shillings, and in default to imprisonment for a period not exceeding six months. The punishment under Count II is a fine of five thousand shillings or in default imprisonment for three months.
These are all mandatory provisions. Besides, the Applicant pleaded guilty, the facts were read to him, and he confirmed them. The plea of guilty was confirmed. As such Section 348 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap. 75, Laws of Kenya) limit the court's power either on revision or appeal from interfering from the findings of the lower court, except on the question of the legality and extent of sentence.
The charges sentence here were in order. In the circumstances, the court's hands are bound by the law.
I however direct the Probation Officer to conduct investigation of the applicant and similar prisoners and make appropriate recommendations on the treatment of such offenders, and submit such report within fourteen (14) days of this order.
Dated and signed at Nakuru this 4th day of March, 2014
M. J. ANYARA EMUKULE
JUDGE