[2022] KEHC 15588 (KLR)
The court found that the sentences imposed by the trial court—two years imprisonment for obtaining by false pretences and eighteen months each for two counts of making a document without authority, all to run concurrently—were within the legal limits and properly considered the aggravating factors. The applicant's...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEHC 15588 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Januaries Nthenge Munguti; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision E019 of 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Revision of Sentence
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- DO Ogembo
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Revision, Obtaining by False Pretences, Making Document Without Authority, Mitigation Factors, Non Custodial Sentence, Concurrent Sentences
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Januaries Nthenge Munguti
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Revision of Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence imposed by the trial court was excessive or improper and should be revised to a non-custodial sentence or a fine.
- 2 Whether the applicant's mitigation and personal circumstances warrant interference with the sentence.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the sentences imposed by the trial court—two years imprisonment for obtaining by false pretences and eighteen months each for two counts of making a document without authority, all to run concurrently—were within the legal limits and properly considered the aggravating factors. The applicant's mitigation, including his family circumstances and remorse, did not outweigh the seriousness of the offences. The court held that there was no legal or factual basis to interfere with the sentence, as it was neither illegal nor excessive. Consequently, the application for revision lacked merit and was dismissed in its entirety.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application for revision of sentence is wholly dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
Munguti v Republic (Criminal Revision E019 of 2022) [2022] KEHC 15588 (KLR) (Crim) (22 November 2022) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2022] KEHC 15588 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Criminal
Criminal Revision E019 of 2022
DO Ogembo, J
November 22, 2022
Between
Januaries Nthenge Munguti
Applicant
and
Republic
Respondent
Ruling
1. The applicant Januaries Nthenge Munguti, has moved this court by way of a Notice of Motion Application dated February 14, 2022. Same is brought under Article 50(2) and section 362 and 364 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The main prayer in this application is at Paragraph 4, that:-“That this Honourable court do exercise its discretion in revising the sentence in 3 counts to non-custodial sentence with option of affordable fine”
2. The affidavit has attached a sworn affidavit in support of this application in which he raises various factors of mitigation. That he is a married man with 2 children, and a sole breadwinner with elderly parents. He also expressed remorse. He has pleaded for a non-custodial sentence or an option of fine.
3. Ms. Akunja for the state did not oppose the application of the applicant in view of the nature of the charges and sentences.
4. I have considered the submissions of the applicant and the Respondent. I have also perused the record of the proceedings of the lower court. The applicant faced 1 count of obtaining money by false pretences contrary to section 313 of the penal code (a sum of Kshs.2. 8million) and 2 counts of making a document without authority contrary to section 357(a) of the Penal Code.
5. On February 10, 2022, he was sentenced to serve 2 years imprisonment on count 1 and 18 months imprisonment on both counts II and III. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently. The sentences provided for 2 offences the applicant faced are 3 years imprisonment for count I and upto 7 years imprisonment for both counts II and III. The trial court obviously took the aggravating factors in the case before passing the sentence.
6. In my view the sentence passed by the trial court was both legal and proper in the circumstances. I therefore find no reason to interfere with the same. I therefore find this application of the applicant lacking in merit. The same is wholly dismissed.Orders accordingly.
HON. D. O. OGEMBOJUDGE22ND NOVEMBER 2022Court:Ruling read out in court (on-line) in presence of the applicant (Nairobi Remand) and Ms. Ntabo for Respondent.HON. D. O. OGEMBOJUDGE22NDNOVEMBER 2022