[2021] KEHC 7261 (KLR)
The High Court found that the trial court imposed the maximum custodial sentence for a misdemeanor without justification, especially considering the appellants were first offenders and the complainant suffered only minor injuries. The only apparent reason for the harsh sentence was the gender of the complainant,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEHC 7261 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Joseph Mweteri; Appellant: Francis Maina; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nanyuki
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 72 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal_allowed_in_part
- Judges
- HPG Waweru
- Legal Topics
- Assault Causing Actual Bodily Harm, Sentencing Principles, Misdemeanour Offences
- 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
Joseph Mweteri
Appellant
Francis Maina
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence of five years imprisonment for assault causing actual bodily harm was manifestly excessive for first offenders.
- 2 Whether the trial court erred in imposing the maximum sentence for a misdemeanor where the injuries were minor.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court found that the trial court imposed the maximum custodial sentence for a misdemeanor without justification, especially considering the appellants were first offenders and the complainant suffered only minor injuries. The only apparent reason for the harsh sentence was the gender of the complainant, which is not a lawful basis for aggravation. The period already served by the appellants—over two years—was deemed sufficient punishment for the offence. The sentences were therefore set aside and substituted with sentences of imprisonment for the time already served, and the appellants were ordered to be released unless otherwise lawfully held.
Court Disposition
appeal_allowed_in_part
Orders
- The sentences of five years imprisonment imposed on the appellants are set aside.
- The appellants are sentenced to imprisonment for the time already served.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
25 paragraphs
Mweteri & another v Republic (Criminal Appeal 72 & 73 of 2018 (Consolidated)) [2021] KEHC 7261 (KLR) (6 May 2021) (Judgment)
Joseph Mweteri & another v Republic [2021] eKLR
Neutral citation: [2021] KEHC 7261 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Nanyuki
Criminal Appeal 72 & 73 of 2018 (Consolidated)
HPG Waweru, J
May 6, 2021
Between
Joseph Mweteri
1st Appellant
Francis Maina
2nd Appellant
and
Republic
Respondent
(From original Conviction and Sentence in Nanyuki CM Criminal Case No 529 of 2018 – D Bosibori, RM)
Judgment
1. The Appellants herein, Joseph Mweteri And Francis Maina, were convicted after trial of assault causing actual bodily harm contrary to section 251 of the Penal Code. It was alleged that on 25/03/2018 at Mutethia Village, Kithithina Location in Buuri Sub-County within Meru County, they jointly and unlawfully assaulted one Triposa Kathure thereby occasioning her actual bodily harm. On 09/10/2018 they were each sentenced to five (5) years imprisonment.
2. The Appellants appealed against both conviction and sentence; however, at the hearing of the appeal both stated that they were satisfied with the conviction and that they wished to pursue only their appeals against sentence. Their appeals against conviction were therefore marked withdrawn.
3. As for the sentence meted out to each Appellant, it is to be noted that the offence under section 251 of the Penal Code is a misdemeanor, not a felony. Secondly, five (5) years imprisonment is the maximum sentence that can be imposed for the offence.
4. The Appellants were first offenders. The injuries suffered by the complainant were minor, comprising bruises and tenderness on the mouth, inflicted by blunt trauma. There is absolutely no justification in the trial court’s record for imposition of the maximum custodial sentence for a misdemeanor. Apparently the only reason for it was that the complainant was a woman.
5. The sentences imposed upon the Appellants were manifestly excessive and cannot be allowed to stand. The same are hereby set aside. The Appellants have been in prison since 09/10/2018, a period of about two (2) years and seven (7) months. That is more than adequate punishment for the misdemeanor they committed. I will therefore sentence them to imprisonment for the time already served.
6. The upshot is that the Appellants shall be set at liberty forthwith unless otherwise lawfully held. It is so ordered.
DATED AND SIGNED AT NANYUKI THIS 5TH DAY OF MAY 2021H P G WAWERUJUDGE