https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/9302
The record showed that the trial court did not indicate that time spent in remand custody had been considered. The revision was therefore allowed and the sentence was ordered to run from the date of arrest pursuant to section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2026] KEHC 9302 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Kennedy Ayienda Oyende; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision E080 of 2026
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling on Sentence Review
- Outcome
- Application allowed.
- Judges
- ["DR Kavedza"]
- Legal Topics
- Sentence Computation, Remand Custody Credit, Revision Application, False Document Offences
- 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
Kennedy Ayienda Oyende
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Sentence Review
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the trial court considered the time the applicant spent in remand custody when sentencing.
- 2 Whether the sentence should be backdated under section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Ratio Decidendi
The record showed that the trial court did not indicate that time spent in remand custody had been considered. The revision was therefore allowed and the sentence was ordered to run from the date of arrest pursuant to section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Court Disposition
Application allowed.
Orders
- The sentence of fifty-six (56) months shall run from 10th September 2025, the date of the applicant’s arrest.
- Orders accordingly.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Oyende v Republic (Criminal Revision E080 of 2026) [2026] KEHC 9302 (KLR) (30 June 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 9302 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the High Court at Kibera Criminal Revision E080 of 2026 DR Kavedza, J June 30, 2026 Between Kennedy Ayienda Oyende Applicant and Republic Respondent Ruling 1.The applicant was charged and convicted of the offence of Making a False Document contrary to section 347(a ) as read with Section 349 of the Penal Code on fourteen Counts. He was sentenced to serve fifty-six (56) months imprisonment. 2.He filed the present application and an affidavit in support of his motion seeking sentence review. The arguments raised are that the trial court failed to consider the time he spent in remand custody during the computation of his sentence. 3.I have considered the application, the affidavit in support and the applicable law. I have also considered the trial court record. The issue for consideration is whether the trial court considered the time the applicant spent in remand. 4.From the record, the trial court in its sentencing failed to indicate that the time spent in remand custody had been considered. 5.In the premises, the application is allowed. The sentence of fifty-six (56) months shall run from 10th September 2025, the date of the applicant’s arrest pursuant to section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.Orders accordingly. RULING DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY THIS 30TH DAY OF JUNE 2026 _______________ D. KAVEDZAJUDGE