[2023] KEHC 180 (KLR)
The High Court found that the trial court had expressly considered the period the applicant spent in remand custody, as evidenced by the sentencing remarks which noted the applicant had been in custody since 2019 and imposed a sentence of 5 years imprisonment, which was below the statutory maximum. Therefore, the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEHC 180 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: David Chacha Kichago; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision E024 of 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Revision of Sentence
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- DO Ogembo
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Principles, Remand Custody Credit, Sexual Offences, Revision Jurisdiction
- 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
David Chacha Kichago
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Revision of Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the trial court properly accounted for the period the applicant spent in remand custody when passing sentence.
- 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to further reduction of sentence under section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court found that the trial court had expressly considered the period the applicant spent in remand custody, as evidenced by the sentencing remarks which noted the applicant had been in custody since 2019 and imposed a sentence of 5 years imprisonment, which was below the statutory maximum. Therefore, the application for further revision under section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code lacked merit, as the applicant had already received the benefit of the time spent in custody being taken into account.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application for revision is wholly dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
Kichago v Republic (Criminal Revision E024 of 2022) [2023] KEHC 180 (KLR) (Crim) (24 January 2023) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEHC 180 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Criminal
Criminal Revision E024 of 2022
DO Ogembo, J
January 24, 2023
Between
David Chacha Kichago
Appellant
and
Republic
Respondent
Ruling
1. The applicant, David Chacha Kichago, has filed a chamber summons application herein on February 17, 2022. The same is for revision under section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. it seeks that the period that the applicant spent in remand custody be accounted for in the sentence. The respondent has opposed this application on grounds that the trial court considered such period spent in custody and noted same in the sentencing proceedings. Also that despite the fact that the offence carries a maximum sentence of 10 years imprisonment, the applicant was only sentenced to serve 5 years imprisonment.
2. I have considered this application and the submissions made to it by the 2 sides. Section 333(2) provides that in sentencing, the period that an accused person has spent in remand custody be accounted for.
3. The applicant faced a charge of defilement contrary to section 8(1) as read with section 8(2) of the Sexual Offences Act. He also faced and was convicted of the alternative charge of indecent at with a child contrary to section 11(1) of the Act. The Act prescribes for a sentence of 10 years imprisonment.
4. I have considered the record of the sentence proceedings before the trial court on September 2, 2021. it is clear that he had been in custody since 2019, a period he urged to be considered. The court then noted;“Having considered the fact that the accused has been in custody since 2019 (2 years), and his mitigation, the accused shall serve a period of 5 years in jail. Right of appeal 14 days.”
5. Clearly, the court in sentencing the applicant, accounted for the period he had spent in remand custody. This application filed herein on February 7, 2022, and based on section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, therefore lacks merit. I dismiss the same wholly.It is so ordered.
HON. D. O. OGEMBOJUDGE24TH JANUARY, 2023. Court:Ruling read out in open court in presence of the applicant (Nairobi Remand) and Ms. Oduor for Respondent.HON. D. O. OGEMBOJUDGE24TH JANUARY, 2023