[2025] KEHC 5161 (KLR)

[2025] KEHC 5161 (KLR)

The court found that the trial court failed to comply with the mandatory requirement under section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code to consider the period the applicants spent in remand custody prior to sentencing. The record showed the applicants were arrested on 9th February 2024 and remained in custody until...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] KEHC 5161 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Austine Mandera; Applicant: Samuel Kariuki; Respondent: Republic
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kibera
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
29 April 2025
Case Number
Criminal Revision E022 of 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Sentence Review
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
DR Kavedza
Legal Topics
Sentencing Review, Remand Custody Credit, Burglary Offences, Application of Section 333 2, Trial Court Obligations
Source Language
english
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Sentencing Review Remand Custody Credit Burglary Offences Application of Section 333 2 Trial Court Obligations

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Austine Mandera

Applicant

Samuel Kariuki

Applicant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Revision / Ruling on Sentence Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial court failed to consider the time spent in remand custody when sentencing the applicants.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants are entitled to have their sentences computed from the date of arrest as per section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the trial court failed to comply with the mandatory requirement under section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code to consider the period the applicants spent in remand custody prior to sentencing. The record showed the applicants were arrested on 9th February 2024 and remained in custody until conviction and sentencing, with no bail or bond granted. The omission to factor in this period was a violation of the applicants' rights and contrary to established legal principles. The court therefore allowed the application and ordered that the sentences of seven years' imprisonment should run from the date of arrest, ensuring compliance with the statutory obligation and...

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • The sentences of seven years' imprisonment imposed by the trial court on the applicants shall run from 9th February 2024, the date of their arrest, pursuant to section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.