[2024] KEHC 1864 (KLR)
The court found that it lacked jurisdiction to review the sentence imposed by the High Court under its revision jurisdiction. The application was deemed a classic abuse of the court process, as the applicant had filed two simultaneous applications regarding the same subject matter in different courts without...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEHC 1864 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Peter Mungai Kanyonyo; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Miscellaneous Application E106 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Review/revision of Sentence
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- SM Mohochi
- Legal Topics
- Revision Jurisdiction, Abuse of Process, Sentence Review, 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
Peter Mungai Kanyonyo
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Review/revision of Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to review its own sentence under revision jurisdiction.
- 2 Whether the application constitutes an abuse of the court process.
- 3 Whether sufficient grounds exist to invoke the revision jurisdiction.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that it lacked jurisdiction to review the sentence imposed by the High Court under its revision jurisdiction. The application was deemed a classic abuse of the court process, as the applicant had filed two simultaneous applications regarding the same subject matter in different courts without disclosure. The court concurred with the respondent that no sufficient grounds had been presented to invoke the revision jurisdiction, and that the matter had already been conclusively determined in a previous application. Accordingly, the application was dismissed for lack of merit and jurisdiction.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application is dismissed for lack of merit.
- No order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
32 paragraphs
Kanyonyo v Republic (Criminal Miscellaneous Application E106 of 2023) [2024] KEHC 1864 (KLR) (28 February 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 1864 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Nakuru
Criminal Miscellaneous Application E106 of 2023
SM Mohochi, J
February 28, 2024
Between
Peter Mungai Kanyonyo
Applicant
and
Republic
Respondent
Ruling
1. The Applicant filed this application invoking the constitution and the criminal revision jurisdiction under Sections 363 and 364 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
2. The Applicant seeks review of Criminal Application No. E002 of 2022, High Court Criminal Appeal No.145 of 2013 and Narok PM’s Court Case No.643 of 2012.
3. He seeks the substitution of his sentence with a probationary term. That he is remorseful and repentant.
4. In his supporting affidavit, the Appellant contends that he was arraigned and charged with robbery with violence in Narok Criminal Case No.643 of 2012.
5. That he was found guilty sentenced to death.
6. That he appealed against conviction and sentence in Nakuru Criminal Case No.145 of 2013 and the appeal was dismissed the sentence confirmed.
7. That later he filed Misc.E002 of 2022 which reversed the sentence of death and substituted it with imprisonment of 20 years.
8. That this Court has jurisdiction to entertain this application.
9. This Court had on 6th December, 2023 directed that the application is a judge matter and does not require physical presence of the Applicant.
10. The Respondent opposed this application for it being an abuse of the court process.
11. That this Court cannot sit in review of its own orders while invoking the revision jurisdiction.
12. No grounds have been presented to invoke the revision jurisdiction.
13. This Court concurs with the Respondent that this application is a classical manifestation of abuse of the process of the law.
14. The Applicant in Kamikaze manner filed 2 simultaneous applications and Misc. E002 of 2022 was assigned to High Court 2 while this instant one is assigned here. The Applicant never made this disclosure.
15. Application E002 of 2022 was heard and concluded reversing the death sentence and substituting the same with a 20 years’ imprisonment term.
16. This Court lacks jurisdiction to review the sentence imposed by the High Court.
17. This application lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed.
SIGNED, DATED AND VIRTUALLY DELIVERED AT NAKURU THIS 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024. MOHOCHI S.MJUDGE