[2018] KEHC 269 (KLR)
The High Court found that the trial court had properly exercised its discretion in sentencing the applicant to a fine of Kshs.50,000 or 5 years imprisonment for the offence of grievous harm, which carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment. The court noted that the sentence was lenient considering the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEHC 269 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Kenneth Mwenda Njagi; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Chuka
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 2 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Revision of Sentence
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- BB Limo
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Principles, Grievous Harm, Judicial Discretion, Penal Code Section 234
- 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
Kenneth Mwenda Njagi
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Revision of Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence imposed on the applicant for the offence of grievous harm was legal, regular, and correct.
- 2 Whether there are sufficient grounds to warrant revision of the sentence imposed by the trial court.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court found that the trial court had properly exercised its discretion in sentencing the applicant to a fine of Kshs.50,000 or 5 years imprisonment for the offence of grievous harm, which carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment. The court noted that the sentence was lenient considering the seriousness of the injury inflicted on the victim, who suffered permanent deformity. The proceedings and sentence were found to be legal, regular, and correct, and there were no sufficient grounds to interfere with or revise the sentence. The application for revision was therefore dismissed.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application for revision of sentence is disallowed.
- The applicant is to serve the sentence as imposed by the trial court.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
18 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT CHUKA
CRIMINAL REVISION NO. 2 OF 2018
(FROM ORIGINAL CONVICTION AND SENTENCE IN CRIMINAL CASE NO. 690 OF 2017 OF THE CHIEF MAGISTRATE'S COURT AT CHUKA)
KENNETH MWENDA NJAGI........................................................... APPLICANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC........................................................................................RESPONDENT
R U L I N G
1. KENNETH MWENDA NJAGI, the applicant herein was charged and convicted upon trial with the offence of grievous harm.
The particulars of the office as per the charge sheet were that on 18th December 2015 at Kaanwa Market Karingani Location within Tharaka Nithi County, the applicant caused grievous harm to Harrison Mureithi.The applicant was found guilty after trial, convicted and sentenced to a fine of Kshs.50,000/- or 5 years imprisonment.
2. The applicant has now moved this court through a Notice of Motion undated filed on 29th January, 2018 for review of his sentence on grounds that he is a sole bread winner and that the conditions in prison are not good for his health.
3. This court has gone through the lower court file in order to satisfy itself of the correctness, legality, regularity and propriety of the proceedings and sentence meted out against the applicant. This court has noted that the victim of the offence for which the applicant was charged really suffered a serious injury following a bite of the applicant who bit off distal part of the fifth finger leaving the finger deformed. The medical expert who examined the victim classified the injury asgrievous and rightly so.The offence of grievous harm under Section 234 of the Penal Code attracts a maximum penalty of life imprisonment. The trial court exercised its discretion and gave the applicant a lenient sentence of Kshs.50,000 or 5 years imprisonment perhaps after taking into consideration mitigating circumstances.
4. This court finds that the proceedings and the sentence meted out thoughlenient was legal regular and correct in the circumstances. I find no merit to interfere with the same.
In the premises the undated application for revision of sentence is unmerited.The same is disallowed and the applicant is advised to serve his sentence,reform and possibly seek for forgiveness and reconciliation with the victim upon finishing his sentence.
Dated, signed and delivered at Chuka this 17th day of December, 2018.
R.K. LIMO
JUDGE
17/12/2018