[2022] KEHC 2913 (KLR)
The court held that the Supreme Court's decision in Muruatetu, as clarified in 2021, was strictly confined to mandatory sentences for murder under section 204 of the Penal Code and does not extend to other offences such as defilement under the Sexual Offences Act. Consequently, the High Court lacks jurisdiction to...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEHC 2913 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Jamin Wafula Wambilianga; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kakamega
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Petition 10 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Petition / Ruling on Jurisdiction and Application for Sentence Review
- Outcome
- petition struck out for want of jurisdiction
- Judges
- DN Musyoka
- Legal Topics
- Defilement, Mandatory Sentencing, Sentence Review, Jurisdiction of High Court
- 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
Jamin Wafula Wambilianga
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Petition / Ruling on Jurisdiction and Application for Sentence Review
Legal Issues
- 1 Does the Supreme Court decision in Muruatetu apply to mandatory sentences for defilement under the Sexual Offences Act?.
- 2 Does the High Court have jurisdiction to review the petitioner.s sentence based on the Muruatetu decision?.
- 3 Is the petition for sentence review competent in light of the Supreme Court clarification?.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the Supreme Court's decision in Muruatetu, as clarified in 2021, was strictly confined to mandatory sentences for murder under section 204 of the Penal Code and does not extend to other offences such as defilement under the Sexual Offences Act. Consequently, the High Court lacks jurisdiction to review or alter the petitioner.s sentence for defilement on the basis of the Muruatetu decision. The petition was therefore incompetent and was struck out for want of jurisdiction.
Court Disposition
petition struck out for want of jurisdiction
Orders
- The petition is struck out as incompetent.
- The file shall be closed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
15 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT KAKAMEGA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 10 OF 2019
JAMIN WAFULA WAMBILIANGA..........................................................PETITIONER
VERSUS
REPUBLIC...................................................................................................RESPONDENT
RULING
1. This matter was placed before me for the purpose of giving directions, in view of the recent decision by the Supreme Court in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic; Katiba Institute & 5 others(Amicus Curiae[2021] (Koome CJ&P, Mwilu DCJ&VP, Ibrahim, Wanjala, Ndung’u & Lenaola SSJJ), with respect to mandatory sentences, where it was clarified that the decision, in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic[2017] eKLR (Maraga CJ&P, Mwilu DCJ&VP, Ojwang, Wanjala, Njoki and Lenaola SCJJ), had arisen from proceedings relating to murder, under section 204 of the Penal Code, Cap 63, Laws of Kenya, and the position stated in the said decision was intended to apply only to mandatory sentences with respect to murder cases.
2. The Motion herein, undated, but filed herein on 31st January 2020, principally rides on the decision, in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic[2017] eKLR (Maraga CJ&P, Mwilu DCJ&VP, Ojwang, Wanjala, Njoki and Lenaola SCJJ), for the petitioner seeks review of his sentence, where he had been convicted of defilement, under sections 8(1)(3) of the Sexual Offences Act, No. 3 of 2006, in Butere PMCCRC No. 166 of 2010, and was sentenced to serve twenty years in prison. He filed appeals in Kakamega HCCRA No. 18 of 2011 and Kisumu CACRA No. 147 of 2014, where the appellate courts affirmed the conviction, and confirmed the sentence.
3. The offence, the subject of the instant proceedings, is not murder, but defilement, as defined in section 8(1)(3) of the Sexual Offences Act, the decision in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic[2017] eKLR (Maraga CJ&P, Mwilu DCJ&VP, Ojwang, Wanjala, Njoki and Lenaola SCJJ), therefore, does not apply to it. As a consequence, the High Court has no jurisdiction to review the sentence that was imposed by the trial court, based on the decision in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic; Katiba Institute & 5 others(Amicus Curiae[2021] (Koome CJ&P, Mwilu DCJ&VP, Ibrahim, Wanjala, Ndung’u & Lenaola SSJJ). Since there is no jurisdiction on my part to entertain the petition, I shall strike it out, for it is incompetent. The said file shall be closed.
4. The Deputy Registrar, shall cause this ruling to be typed, and copies thereof availed to the petitioner and the office of Director of Public Prosecutions, Kakamega.
PREPARED, DATED AND SIGNED AT KAKAMEGA THIS 14TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2022
W MUSYOKA
JUDGE