[2023] KEHC 19304 (KLR)
The court found that the trial court imposed the maximum sentence of 20 years for defilement under section 8(3) of the Sexual Offences Act without indicating whether it exercised discretion as required. The evidence showed that the complainant only disclosed the relationship after her father saw the applicant...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEHC 19304 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Stanley Mucoka Kiria; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Mombasa
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application E236 of 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Sentence Review
- Outcome
- Application for sentence review allowed; applicant to be released unless otherwise lawfully detained.
- Judges
- A. Ong’injo
- Legal Topics
- Defilement, Sentencing Discretion, Sentence Review, Mitigation, Sexual Offences, Child Protection
- 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
Stanley Mucoka Kiria
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Sentence Review
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence imposed on the applicant was appropriate in light of the circumstances and mitigation.
- 2 Whether the trial court exercised its discretion in sentencing as required under the law.
- 3 Whether the time already served by the applicant constituted sufficient punishment.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the trial court imposed the maximum sentence of 20 years for defilement under section 8(3) of the Sexual Offences Act without indicating whether it exercised discretion as required. The evidence showed that the complainant only disclosed the relationship after her father saw the applicant fleeing, suggesting the applicant could not be wholly faulted. Considering the time already served by the applicant, including remand from January 1, 2021 to June 29, 2023, totaling approximately 12 years, the court determined this was sufficient punishment. It would be inexpedient to continue incarcerating the applicant, and he should be released unless otherwise lawfully detained.
Court Disposition
Application for sentence review allowed; applicant to be released unless otherwise lawfully detained.
Orders
- The applicant is to be released forthwith unless otherwise lawfully detained.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
Kiria v Republic (Miscellaneous Criminal Application E236 of 2022) [2023] KEHC 19304 (KLR) (29 June 2023) (Order)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEHC 19304 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Mombasa
Miscellaneous Criminal Application E236 of 2022
A. Ong’injo, J
June 29, 2023
Between
Stanley Mucoka Kiria
Applicant
and
Republic
Respondent
Order
29/06/2023Before Hon. Lady Justice A. Ong’injo JOgwel – Court Asst.Mr. Ngiri – Court Prosecutor 1. Applicant was charged with the offence of defilement of 13 years old girl on diverse dates between November 6, 2016 and December 23, 2016 at Tiwi location Kwale county. He was convicted and sentenced to serve 20 years imprisonment on August 31, 2017.
2. The applicants appeal on conviction was dismissed for lacking merit in CR A. No 21 of 2018.
3. The applicant now applies that the court reviews his sentence in consideration of his mitigation and in line with the decisions in the authorities he has cited.
4. This court has considered the application and noted that the applicant was sentenced to serve 20 years jail term which is the maximum under section 8(3) of Act No 3 of 2006 without indicating whether discretion was exercised. This court finds that it is a duty of any trial court to indicate extent to which discretion has been exercised.
5. From the evidence on record if it was not that the complainants father saw the applicant run away from the home the complainant would not have disclosed that she had a consensual relationship with the applicant. The applicant cannot therefore be faulted wholly.
6. This court is minded of the appropriate sentence in similar cases and find that time served by applicant since he was remanded in custody during trial on January 1, 2021 todate June 29, 2023, a total of 12 years is sufficient punishment and it would be inexpedient to incarcerate him any further. He should be released forthwith unless lawfully detained.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED IN OPEN COURT THIS 29TH DAY OF JUNE 2023. HON. LADY JUSTICE A. ONG’INJOJUDGE