[2025] KEHC 2374 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant, having been convicted of arson, threatening to kill, and stock theft against his own mother, and being described as a repeat offender and a threat to both the victim and the community, is not suitable for a non-custodial sentence. The sentiments of the victim, community, and local...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEHC 2374 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Kanyakera Loinai; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kabarnet
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision E100 of 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Revision of Sentence
- Outcome
- application for revision of sentence dismissed
- Judges
- RB Ngetich
- Legal Topics
- Sentence Revision, Arson, Threats to Kill, Stock Theft, Penal Code Offences
- 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
Kanyakera Loinai
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Revision of Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is suitable for a non-custodial sentence upon review of the custodial sentence imposed for arson, threatening to kill, and stock theft.
- 2 Whether the interests of the victim, community, and public safety outweigh the applicant's request for sentence revision.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant, having been convicted of arson, threatening to kill, and stock theft against his own mother, and being described as a repeat offender and a threat to both the victim and the community, is not suitable for a non-custodial sentence. The sentiments of the victim, community, and local administration were considered, all of whom opposed the review due to safety concerns and the applicant's criminal history. The court determined that the interests of justice and public safety outweigh the applicant's plea for leniency, and there was no manifest injustice or illegality in the original sentence to warrant revision. Accordingly, the application for revision of...
Court Disposition
application for revision of sentence dismissed
Orders
- Application for revision of sentence is hereby dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
27 paragraphs
Loinai v Republic (Criminal Revision E100 of 2024) [2025] KEHC 2374 (KLR) (6 March 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 2374 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Kabarnet
Criminal Revision E100 of 2024
RB Ngetich, J
March 6, 2025
Between
Kanyakera Loinai
Applicant
and
Republic
Prosecutor
Ruling
1. The Applicant Kanyakera Loinaiwas charged with 3 counts are as follows:-Count 1 is the offence of Arson contrary to section 333(a) of the Penal Code. The particulars of the offence is that the accused was charged on the 4th day of August, 2021 at Chou Sub-Location, Chepellow Location in Tiaty East Sub-County within Baringo County wilfully and unlawfully set fire to a grass thatched dwelling house valued at Kenya Shillings Seventy Thousand (Kshs. 70,000/=) belonging to Cheposangai Loinai.Count II is the offence of threatening to kill contrary toe section 223(1) of the Penal Code. The particulars of the offence is that on the 26th day of April, 2021 at Chou Sub-Location, Chepellow Location in Tiaty East Sub-County within Baringo County without lawful excuse uttered the words to wit “It’s today when I will decide where your live will be” to Cheposangai Loinai which were meant to cause fear to the said Cheposangai Loinai.Count III is the offence of stealing stock contrary to section 278 of the Penal Code. The particulars of the offence is that on the 11th day of December, 2020 at Chou Sub-Location, Chepellow Location in Tiaty East Sub-County within Baringo County stole six (6) cows and twenty (20) goats all valued at Kenya shillings Two Hundred and Forty Thousand (Kshs.240,000/=) the property of Cheposangai Loinai.
2. The Applicant denied the charge and the case proceeded for full trial. By judgment delivered on 1/12/2021, the applicant was convicted for the 3 counts and on 6/12/2021 the applicant was sentenced to serve 7 years imprisonment for count 1, 3 years imprisonment for count 2 and 5 years imprisonment for count 3. The sentences in count 1 and 2 were to run concurrently and the sentence in count 3 to run consecutively with count 1 and count 2.
3. The applicant seeks review of the remaining sentence to non-custodial sentence. I called for presentence report which was filed on 6th February 2025.
Social Inquiry Report. 4. From the report, the applicant is aged 42 years. He had no formal education. The complainant is the biological mother of the applicant who is elderly and extremely poor. From the report the applicant torched his mother’s grass thatched house which was built for her by the community.
5. From the report, the applicant joined a gang of youth in the community which terrorized the community members and is well known by local leaders for criminal activities and at one incident, he sustained gun shot from community security. He is confirmed single by village elder though he alleges to be married.
6. The victims is still bitter and fear that the applicant may kill her if released. She stated that he tried rape her and burn her in the house. She went ahead to say she will curse him. She is opposed to review of sentence.
7. The local administration also oppose review of sentence as they term applicant a dangerous person within the community. He is described as repeat offender. He says the applicant narrowly escaped death after being shot in one instant.
8. All community members interviewed consider applicant as a threat. They also say it will be difficult to supervise him out of prison as he is single person.
Determination. 9. I have considered sentiments by the victim, the community and the local administration. From the sentiments given, the applicant is a repeat offender. He is a threat to his own to his own mother and to the community at large. In view of the above, I do not find applicant suitable for non-custodial sentence.
10. Final Orders:-Application for revision of sentence is hereby dismissed.
RULING DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED VIRTUALLY AT KABARNET THIS 6TH DAY OF MARCH 2025. .............................RACHEL NGETICHJUDGEIn the presence of: Ms. Bartilol for State.
Applicant present.
Elvis/Momanyi – Court Assistants.