[2021] KEHC 9591 (KLR)

[2021] KEHC 9591 (KLR)

The High Court has jurisdiction to revisit sentences imposed under mandatory sentencing regimes declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in Muruatetu. While the Petitioner sought leniency, the court found that the gravity of the offence—incest committed against a five-year-old daughter—demanded a severe...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KEHC 9591 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: MBT; Respondent: Director of Public Prosecution
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Petition 162 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Resentencing Application / Judgment
Outcome
Life imprisonment set aside; Petitioner sentenced to 27 years' imprisonment from date of conviction.
Judges
DO Ogembo
Legal Topics
Sentencing Principles, Sexual Offences, Incest, Mandatory Sentences, Judicial Discretion
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Sentencing Principles Sexual Offences Incest Mandatory Sentences Judicial Discretion

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MBT

Applicant

Director of Public Prosecution

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Resentencing Application / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to revisit and interfere with a sentence of life imprisonment imposed under a mandatory sentencing regime.
  2. 2 What constitutes an appropriate sentence for the offence of incest committed by the Petitioner against his minor daughter.

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court has jurisdiction to revisit sentences imposed under mandatory sentencing regimes declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in Muruatetu. While the Petitioner sought leniency, the court found that the gravity of the offence—incest committed against a five-year-old daughter—demanded a severe custodial sentence. The court held that although it could interfere with the life sentence, the punishment must still reflect the seriousness of the crime. The court therefore set aside the life imprisonment and substituted it with a determinate sentence of 27 years' imprisonment from the date of conviction, finding this to be proportionate to the offence and in line with the...

Court Disposition

Life imprisonment set aside; Petitioner sentenced to 27 years' imprisonment from date of conviction.

Orders

  • The life imprisonment imposed on the Petitioner by the trial court is set aside.
  • The Petitioner is sentenced to 27 years' imprisonment from the date of conviction.