[2023] KEHC 25048 (KLR)
The court found that the previous ruling erroneously credited the applicant with 2 years and 4 months of pretrial custody, while the correct period was 1 year 4 months and 1 day. Upon review of the trial record and submissions, the court held that only the actual period spent in custody should be deducted from the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEHC 25048 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: John Mwita Kerario; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kibera
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision 40 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling on Sentence Computation Clarification
- Outcome
- application for clarification allowed; sentence computation corrected
- Judges
- DR Kavedza
- Legal Topics
- Defilement Offence, Sentence Computation, Pretrial Custody Credit
- 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 Mwita Kerario
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Sentence Computation Clarification
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the period the applicant spent in pretrial custody was correctly computed and credited towards his sentence.
- 2 Whether the previous court ruling erroneously included an incorrect period of custody in the sentence computation.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the previous ruling erroneously credited the applicant with 2 years and 4 months of pretrial custody, while the correct period was 1 year 4 months and 1 day. Upon review of the trial record and submissions, the court held that only the actual period spent in custody should be deducted from the applicant's sentence. The court exercised its revisionary jurisdiction to correct the error and directed prison authorities to include only the verified period of 1 year 4 months and 1 day in the computation of the applicant's sentence, thereby ensuring the sentence reflects the true period of pretrial detention as required by law.
Court Disposition
application for clarification allowed; sentence computation corrected
Orders
- The period the applicant spent in custody from 25/2/2017 to 26/6/2018, being 1 year 4 months and 1 day, shall be included in the computation of his sentence by the prison officers.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
Kerario v Republic (Criminal Revision 40 of 2023) [2023] KEHC 25048 (KLR) (9 November 2023) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEHC 25048 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Kibera
Criminal Revision 40 of 2023
DR Kavedza, J
November 9, 2023
Between
John Mwita Kerario
Applicant
and
Republic
Respondent
Ruling
1. The applicant was charged, convicted and sentenced to ten (10) years imprisonment for the offence of defilement contrary to section 8(1) as read with section 8(2) of the Sexual Offences Act. He subsequently filed an application in HC Criminal Revision No. E017 of 2022 seeking a review of his sentence to take into account the period he spent in custody.
2. The court while invoking its revisionary jurisdiction under section 362 of the Criminal Procedure Code allowed the application. It further directed that the period of 2 years and 4 months that the applicant spent in custody during the trial, be included in the computation of his sentence.
3. However, vide a letter dated April 12, 2023, the Officer in Charge of Nairobi West Prisons sought clarity and directions from the court regarding the computation of the applicant’s sentence. It was averred that the applicant was arrested on 25/2/2017 and released on cash bail of Kshs.50,000 on 25/6/2018. He was subsequently sentenced on 29/11/2018 having spent 1 year 4 months and 1 day in custody.
4. I have considered the letter dated April 12, 2023, the responses thereto, as well as the trial record. I have further considered the ruling of Githua J dated April 21, 2022 wherein it was noted that that the applicant was remanded in custody until January 18, 2019 after depositing a cash bail of Kshs.50,000.
5. The trial record however reveals that the applicant was arrested on 25/2/2017 and remanded in custody until 25/6/2018. I therefore agree with the respondent that the applicant spent 1 year 4 months and 1 day in custody and not 2 years and 4 months as initially indicated in the ruling dated 21/4/2022.
6. In the interest of justice, I hereby correct this error and direct that the period the applicant spent in custody from 25/2/2017 to 26/6/2018, being 1 year 4 months and 1 day, to be included in the computation of his sentence by the prison officers.
7. It is so ordered.
RULING DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY THIS 9TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2023. D.KAVEDZAJUDGEIn the presence of:Ms Akunja for the State.Applicant present (VTC).