https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/7514

Amir v ODPP (Criminal Revision E213 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 7514 (KLR) (15 May 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 7514 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the High Court at Mombasa Criminal Revision E213 of 2025 WM Kagendo., J May 15, 2026 Between Maimuna Jamanne Amir Applicant and ODPP Respondent (Revision of sentence from HCCR Appeal No. E005 of 2024 arising from Criminal Case No. E729 of 2021 delivered on 14th March 2024 at Mombasa) Ruling 1.The undated Notice of Motion application before this Court, filed by the Applicant, is brought under Section 364 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Through the said application, the Applicant seeks review of the sentence imposed by this Court in High Court Criminal Appeal No. E005 of 2024. 2.The Applicant was originally charged before the trial court with the offence of trafficking in narcotic drugs contrary to Section 4(a) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Control) Act, Cap 245 Laws of Kenya. Upon conviction, she was sentenced to pay a fine of Kshs. 48,501,000/= or, in default, to serve ten (10) years’ imprisonment, in addition to thirty-five (35) years’ imprisonment. 3.On appeal, the High Court in Criminal Appeal No. E005 of 2024 varied the sentence and imposed sixteen (16) years’ imprisonment, to run from 14th March 2021, being the date the Appellant was taken into custody. The Court further upheld the fine of Kshs. 48,501,000/=, with a default sentence of twelve (12) months’ imprisonment. 4.The Applicant now seeks a further review of the said sentence. 5.I have carefully considered the application, the supporting affidavit, and the submissions on record. The issue for determination is whether this Court has jurisdiction to entertain the application and, if so, whether the application has merit. 6.It is a well-established principle of law that a Judge of the High Court cannot review, vary, or set aside a decision or sentence imposed by another Judge of concurrent jurisdiction. This principle is anchored in the doctrine of judicial comity, the hierarchy of courts, and the need for finality and certainty in judicial decisions. In this particular case the revision is not even a year old, and nothing drastic has happened to change the circumstances 7.In Republic v Karisa Chengo & 2 Others (2017) eKLR, the Supreme Court of Kenya held that a court of concurrent jurisdiction cannot sit on appeal or review the decision of another court of equal status except as provided by law. 8.Similarly, in Joseph Nduvi Mbuvi v Republic (2019) eKLR, the Court of Appeal reaffirmed that a Judge of the High Court lacks jurisdiction to sit on appeal over or review the decision of another Judge of the same court, as doing so would undermine judicial comity and the integrity of the justice system. 9.In the premises, this Court finds that it lacks jurisdiction to entertain the present application. The Applicant’s proper recourse, if aggrieved by the sentence, lies in an appeal to the Court of Appeal pursuant to Article 164(3) of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010. 10.Accordingly, the application is devoid of merit and is hereby dismissed. DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT MOMBASA THIS 15TH DAY OF MAY 2026.DELIVERED THROUGH MICROSOFT TEAMS ONLINE PLATFORM.WENDY KAGENDO MICHENI JUDGESIGNED BY/FOR:HON. LADY JUSTICE WENDY MICHENI