Makau alias Wambua v Republic [2025] KEHC 10327 (KLR)
- Citation
- [2025] KEHC 10327 (KLR)
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Court
- High Court
- Panel
- RN Nyakundi
- Case number
- Criminal Petition E007 of 2024
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- High Court
- Panel
- RN Nyakundi
- Case number
- Criminal Petition E007 of 2024
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court found that the sentence imposed by the trial court was legal and within the law. However, after considering the nature of the offence, the Applicant's period of incarceration (almost two years), his remorse, and rehabilitation efforts, the court exercised its discretion to commute the remaining sentence to the period already served. The court held that the time spent in prison constituted sufficient punishment and ordered the Applicant's immediate release unless otherwise lawfully held.
Court disposition
sentence commuted to period served; applicant released
Orders
- The custodial sentence imposed upon the Applicant in Eldoret Chief Magistrates Court Criminal Case No. E1662 of 2023 is commuted to the period served.
- The Applicant is ordered set at liberty and released from prison forthwith unless otherwise lawfully held.
02
Material facts
Parties
Yusuf Makau alias Wambua
ApplicantRepublic
RespondentAmounts and remedies
- Original Sentence (years): 5
03
Procedural history
Posture
Criminal Petition / Sentence Review Ruling
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the sentence imposed on the Applicant was harsh or excessive in the circumstances.
- 02
Whether the trial court applied the correct legal principles in sentencing the Applicant.
- 03
Whether the period already served by the Applicant is sufficient punishment.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The Applicant does not oppose the conviction or sentence but pleads for reduction of the sentence on grounds that it is too harsh, he is the breadwinner for his family, he is remorseful, has undertaken rehabilitation courses in prison, and has learnt to live harmoniously with society.
- Respondent
- The Respondent did not file a formal response but the court considered the legality and appropriateness of the sentence imposed by the trial court.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Penal Code section 307; general sentencing jurisprudence
An appellate court will only interfere with a sentence if it is shown that the sentence was illegal, based on wrong principles, or manifestly harsh or lenient.
- 02
Judicial discretion in sentencing; case law on sentence review
The period already served in custody may be considered sufficient punishment where the circumstances justify commutation of sentence.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court found that the sentence imposed by the trial court was legal and within the law. However, after considering the nature of the offence, the Applicant's period of incarceration (almost two years), his remorse, and rehabilitation efforts, the court exercised its discretion to commute the remaining sentence to the period already served. The court held that the time spent in prison constituted sufficient punishment and ordered the Applicant's immediate release unless otherwise lawfully held.
Obiter and limits
- Judicial discretion in sentencing must be exercised judiciously and only interfered with where there is clear evidence of misapplication of legal principles.
- Rehabilitation and remorse are relevant factors in considering sentence review applications.
Court disposition
sentence commuted to period served; applicant released
- The custodial sentence imposed upon the Applicant in Eldoret Chief Magistrates Court Criminal Case No. E1662 of 2023 is commuted to the period served.
- The Applicant is ordered set at liberty and released from prison forthwith unless otherwise lawfully held.
Source and reliance status
High Court
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
High Court
Judgment
Makau alias Wambua v Republic (Criminal Petition E007 of 2024) [2025] KEHC 10327 (KLR) (18 July 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 10327 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Eldoret
Criminal Petition E007 of 2024
RN Nyakundi, J
July 18, 2025
Between
Yusuf Makau alias Wambua
Applicant
and
Republic
Respondent
Ruling
1. The Applicant/Petitioner herein was charged with the offence of breaking into a building with intent to commit a felony contrary to section 307 of the Penal Code at the trial Court. The particulars of the offence were that Yusuf Makau alias Wambua on the night of 24th and 25th July 2023 at Kahuho Estate at Burnt Forest Area in Ainabkoi Sub-County within Uasin Gishu County broke and entered a building namely sheep shed/pen house belonging to Dickson Ndungu Mwathi with intent to steal a sheep therein.
2. The Applicant/Petitioner herein was tried and in the judgment delivered on 8th November, 2023, the trial court found the Applicant guilty of the offence as charged. After considering the Applicant’s mitigation, the court proceeded to sentence him to serve 5 years’ imprisonment.
3. Being aggrieved with the sentence, the Applicant filed the petition dated 30th December 2024 which was based on the following grounds:a.That I do not oppose the charges/sentence.b.That I beg this Hon court to consider my application of reducing the sentence for it is too harsh.c.That upon my arrest I was a bread winner to the entire family including my two daughters who are now taken care of by my mother and they need my support.d.That I am a remorseful person having taken some courses while in prison that include carpentry and theology.e.That prison life has taught me a lot on how to live in harmony with the society.
Decision 4. This court has carefully considered this application. When the trial court sentenced the Applicant to serve the custodial sentence, it was exercising judicial discretion. This court can only interfere with such exercise of discretion if it is established, either that the sentence was too harsh or too lenient in the circumstances. The court will also interfere with the imposition of the custodial sentence if it is established that the trial magistrate applied the wrong principles of the law in sentencing the Applicant or that the sentence was illegal.
5. In the present application, it was clear to the court that the sentences imposed upon the Applicant were legal. This court has also taken into account the nature of the offence that the Applicant was convicted of. It has also taken into account that the Applicant has been in prison for almost 2 years since the date of arrest being August 1st 2023. This court formed the view that the period the Applicant has been in prison is sufficient punishment. He has learnt his lesson. In the premises therefore, the custodial sentence imposed upon the Appellant in Eldoret Chief Magistrates Court Criminal Case No. E1662 of 2023 is hereby commuted to the period served. The Applicant is ordered set at liberty and released from prison forthwith unless otherwise lawfully held. It is so ordered.
DATED AND SIGNED AT ELDORET THIS 18TH DAY OF JULY 2025. .........................R. NYAKUNDIJUDGE
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.