[2025] KEHC 1882 (KLR)
The court found that the trial court did not consider the applicant's period in remand custody when passing sentence, despite the applicant's mitigation raising this issue. Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code is mandatory and obligates the court to deduct the period spent in custody from the sentence...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEHC 1882 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Kenneth Kiprotich Korir; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Iten
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Criminal Appeal E012 of 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Criminal Appeal / Ruling on Application for Computation of Remand Period Under Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Judges
- E Ominde
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Remission, Remand Period Computation, Criminal Appeals
- 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 Kiprotich Korir
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Criminal Appeal / Ruling on Application for Computation of Remand Period Under Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the period of 15 months and 26 days spent in remand custody by the applicant should be factored into his 5-year sentence as required by Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the trial court did not consider the applicant's period in remand custody when passing sentence, despite the applicant's mitigation raising this issue. Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code is mandatory and obligates the court to deduct the period spent in custody from the sentence imposed. The lower court's failure to do so was an error, and the High Court is therefore required to correct this by directing that the period of 15 months and 26 days spent in remand be computed as part of the applicant's 5-year sentence.
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- The period of 15 months and 26 days spent in remand custody by the applicant shall be computed as part of the 5-year imprisonment sentence imposed by the trial court.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
Korir v Republic (Miscellaneous Criminal Appeal E012 of 2024) [2025] KEHC 1882 (KLR) (6 February 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 1882 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Iten
Miscellaneous Criminal Appeal E012 of 2024
E Ominde, J
February 6, 2025
Between
Kenneth Kiprotich Korir
Applicant
and
Republic
Respondent
Ruling
1. The Applicant’s Application filed on 13th August 2024 is brought under Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking that the Period of 16 months that he spent in remand be factored into the sentence of 5 years’ imprisonment that was handed down to him by the Trial Court
2. The Prosecution in its oral response objected to the Application and stated that this period had already been factored in by the Trial Court at the time of sentencing. The Applicant disputed this submission and stated that at the time of sentencing, he was only informed of his right to appeal within 14 days.
3. I have perused the Lower Court file. I have noted that the Applicant did pray for leniency in his mitigation and he cited the fact that he had been in remand throughout the trial and requested that the court takes this into consideration in passing the sentence.
4. However, I note from the record of proceedings of the sentencing that the Court did not consider this mitigation in sentencing the accused and the court did also not act on its own motion to factor in this period.
5. That said, The Lower Court file shows that the Applicant was arrested on 10th January 2020 and charged on 13th January 2020 and he was in remand custody throughout the trial. He was sentenced of 5th May 2021. This brings the time spent in remand to a period of 15 months and 26 days.
6. In light of the fact that the provisions of Section 333(2) is a mandatory provision, the court is obligated to apply it. For this reason, I find merit in the Application by the Applicant and I allow the same as prayed. I therefore direct that the period of 15 months and 26 days is therefore to be computed into the term of 5 years’ imprisonment that the applicant was sentenced to serve.
7. Right of Appeal 14 days.
READ DATED AND SIGNED AT ITEN ON 6TH FEBRUARY 2025E. OMINDEJUDGE