[2024] KEHC 9600 (KLR)

[2024] KEHC 9600 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant was in custody for ten months and three days prior to sentencing, and the trial court failed to consider this period when imposing sentence. Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code and the Judiciary Sentencing Policy Guidelines mandate that such pre-sentence custody must be...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] KEHC 9600 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Peter Kivuitu Masambu; Respondent: Republic
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Vihiga
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
31 July 2024
Case Number
Miscellaneous Criminal Application E049 of 2024
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Sentence Computation Application
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
JN Kamau
Legal Topics
Sentencing Computation, Pretrial Custody Credit, Fair Trial Rights
Source Language
english
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Sentencing Computation Pretrial Custody Credit Fair Trial Rights

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Kivuitu Masambu

Applicant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Sentence Computation Application

  1. 1 Whether the period the applicant spent in custody prior to sentencing should be taken into account in computing his sentence under Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
  2. 2 Whether the failure by the trial court to consider pre-sentence custody contravened the applicant's right to a fair trial.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant was in custody for ten months and three days prior to sentencing, and the trial court failed to consider this period when imposing sentence. Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code and the Judiciary Sentencing Policy Guidelines mandate that such pre-sentence custody must be credited towards the sentence. The omission by the trial court was a violation of the applicant's rights, and the court exercised its discretion to grant the application. Taking into account the period already served and remission, the applicant had completed his sentence and was entitled to immediate release unless held for another lawful cause.

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • The period the applicant spent in custody between 14th May 2022 and 16th March 2023 shall be taken into account in computing his sentence as provided in Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
  • The applicant is to be released from custody forthwith unless held for any other lawful cause.