[2017] KEHC 9715 (KLR)
The court held that while Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code empowers courts to consider the period spent in custody when passing sentence, it does not impose a mandatory obligation to deduct the remand period from the sentence in every case. The judge found that the applicant had been in remand for three...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEHC 9715 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: John Mutua Munyao; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision 29 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Revision, Remand Period Credit, Handling Stolen Goods, Robbery With Violence
- 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
John Mutua Munyao
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the period spent in remand custody should be deducted from the applicant's sentence.
- 2 Whether Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code mandates reduction of sentence by remand period in all cases.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that while Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code empowers courts to consider the period spent in custody when passing sentence, it does not impose a mandatory obligation to deduct the remand period from the sentence in every case. The judge found that the applicant had been in remand for three years and ten months prior to sentencing and had served one year of the four-year sentence. However, given the gravity of the offence—being found in possession of 878 laptops without explanation—and the fact that the offence carries a maximum sentence of 14 years, the court exercised its discretion not to reduce the sentence by the full remand period. The court determined that...
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application for revision of sentence is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
16 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CRIMINAL DIVISION
CRIMINAL REVISION NUMBER 29 OF 2017
JOHN MUTUA MUNYAO.…..…..APPLICANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC…………...………..RESPONDENT
RULING
By a Notice of Motion filed on 18th July, 2017 by the Applicant in person, he prays for the revision of the sentence he is currently serving by reducing the same by the number of days he spent in custody. He was charged with the offence of robbery with violence contrary to Section 296(2) of the Penal Code with an alternative count of handling stolen goods contrary to Section 322(2) of the Penal Code. He was found guilty for the alternative charge and was sentenced to serve four years imprisonment. The same was passed on 23rd November, 2016.
A perusal of the original record of proceedings confirms that he was in remand throughout the period of the entire trial. He took plea on 25th January, 2013. He was therefore in remand for a period of three years, ten months. As at date, he has served the sentence for exactly one year. Cumulatively therefore, he has been in remand for a period of four years ten months. This notwithstanding, I take into account the circumstances of the offence which were grave. He was found in possession of 878 laptops for which he could not explain how he came by their possession. Furthermore, the offence which he was convicted for is a felony which carries a sentence of up to 14 years imprisonment. Therefore, although he had spent the three years and ten months in custody before the sentence was passed, it is my view that he must serve a minimum of two years before his sentence can be revised. After all, Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code does not make it mandatory that the period spent in custody must be reduced from the sentence. Each case depends on its circumstances. In the circumstances, the application fails and the same is dismissed.
Dated and Delivered at Nairobi This 22nd November, 2017.
G.W. NGENYE-MACHARIA
JUDGE
In the presence of;
1. Applicant present in person.
2. M/s Nyauncho for the Respondent.