[2025] KEHC 3868 (KLR)

[2025] KEHC 3868 (KLR)

The court found that the trial court erred by failing to consider the period the applicant spent in remand custody when passing sentence. Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code mandates that any period spent in custody prior to sentencing must be taken into account. The record showed that the applicant was...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] KEHC 3868 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Diana Mukuhi; Respondent: Republic
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kiambu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Criminal Revision E005 of 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Revision of Sentence Commencement Date
Outcome
application allowed; sentence revised to commence from date of arrest; applicant deemed to have fully served sentence and to be released unless otherwise lawfully held.
Judges
A Mshila
Legal Topics
Sentencing Revision, Remand Period Deduction, Commencement of Sentence, Section 333 2 Criminal Procedure Code
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Sentencing Revision Remand Period Deduction Commencement of Sentence Section 333 2 Criminal Procedure Code

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Diana Mukuhi

Applicant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Revision of Sentence Commencement Date

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to have the period spent in remand custody deducted from her sentence under Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the trial court erred by failing to consider the period the applicant spent in remand custody when passing sentence. Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code mandates that any period spent in custody prior to sentencing must be taken into account. The record showed that the applicant was unable to raise bail and remained in remand from the date of arrest. The court concluded that the applicant was entitled to benefit from Section 333(2), and therefore ordered that her sentence be deemed to have commenced from the date of arrest, effectively resulting in the sentence being fully served.

Court Disposition

application allowed; sentence revised to commence from date of arrest; applicant deemed to have fully served sentence and to be released unless otherwise lawfully held.

Orders

  • The application is allowed; the sentence shall commence from the date of arrest being 23rd March, 2024.
  • The term is hereby deemed as having been fully served.