[2024] KEHC 6421 (KLR)
The court held that the mandatory death sentence for robbery with violence is unconstitutional as it removes judicial discretion in sentencing. Applying the Supreme Court's reasoning in Muruatetu and subsequent High Court decisions, the court found that sentencing must allow for consideration of the circumstances of...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEHC 6421 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: John Nakusi; Applicant: Kennedy Mwenda Thuranira; Applicant: Moses Thuranira Kiriao; Respondent: Director of Public Prosecutions
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Petition E004 of 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Constitutional Petition / Resentencing Ruling
- Outcome
- Death sentence substituted with thirty years' imprisonment; sentences to run concurrently.
- Judges
- TW Cherere
- Legal Topics
- Mandatory Sentencing, Death Penalty, Judicial Discretion, Resentencing, Robbery With Violence, Sexual 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
John Nakusi
Applicant
Kennedy Mwenda Thuranira
Applicant
Moses Thuranira Kiriao
Applicant
Director of Public Prosecutions
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Resentencing Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the mandatory death sentence for robbery with violence is unconstitutional following the Supreme Court decision in Muruatetu.
- 2 Whether the petitioners are entitled to resentencing based on the unconstitutionality of mandatory minimum sentences.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the mandatory death sentence for robbery with violence is unconstitutional as it removes judicial discretion in sentencing. Applying the Supreme Court's reasoning in Muruatetu and subsequent High Court decisions, the court found that sentencing must allow for consideration of the circumstances of each case, including aggravating and mitigating factors. In this case, despite the serious and aggravated nature of the offences, the court exercised its discretion to substitute the death sentence with a term of thirty years' imprisonment, to run concurrently with the sentences for rape and defilement.
Court Disposition
Death sentence substituted with thirty years' imprisonment; sentences to run concurrently.
Orders
- The death sentence in count 1 is substituted with a term of thirty (30) years' imprisonment.
- The sentences in count 1 shall be computed concurrently with the sentences in counts 2 and 3.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
26 paragraphs
Nakusi & 2 others v Director of Public Prosecutions (Petition E004 of 2024) [2024] KEHC 6421 (KLR) (30 May 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 6421 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Meru
Petition E004 of 2024
TW Cherere, J
May 30, 2024
Between
John Nakusi
1st Petitioner
Kennedy Mwenda Thuranira
2nd Petitioner
Moses Thuranira Kiriao
3rd Petitioner
and
The Director of Public Prosecutions
Respondent
Ruling
1. Petitioners were charged in Meru Criminal Case No. 544 of 2016. In the 1st count of robbery with violence, Petitioners were sentenced to suffer death. In the 2nd count of rape, 1st Appellant was sentences to serve 10 years’ imprisonment. In the 3rd count of gang defilement, the 2nd and 3rd Petitioners were sentenced to serve 15 years’ imprisonment.
2. Their appeal vide Meru Criminal Appeal No. 32 of 2015 was dismissed on 09th November, 2022 and they did not appeal to the Court of Appeal.
3. Petitioners seek resentence in count 1 following the Supreme Court decision in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & 5 Others v Republic, Petition No. 5 of 2015 (2017) eKLR where the said superior court held that the mandatory death sentence for the offence of murder as provided in Section 204 of the Penal Code is unconstitutional as it deprives courts of their inherent jurisdiction not to impose a death sentence in an appropriate case.
4. Respondent opposed the resentence and urged the court to consider the aggravating factors in this instance which are the serious nature particularly that Petitioners were armed with dangerous weapons among them a gun and they not only robbed the complainant but also raped her and defiled her 14-year-old daughter.
5. I have considered the verdict in Maingi & 5 others v Director of Public Prosecutions & Another (Petition E017 of 2021) [2022] KEHC 13118 (KLR) (Odunga J. as he then was) and Edwin Wachira & Others v Republic – Mombasa Petition No. 97 of 2021, Mativo J. (as he then was). The rationale behind the decisions is pegged to the fact that a minimum mandatory sentence takes away the jurisdiction conferred on judicial officers to exercise their discretion when meting out sentence.
6. Taking all these factors into consideration, the nature of the offence and the circumstances under which it was committed, the death sentence is substituted with a thirty (30) years’ imprisonment term.
7. The sentences in count 1 shall accordingly be computed concurrently with the sentences in counts 2 and 3.
DELIVERED AT MERU THIS 30TH DAY OF MAY 2024WAMAE. T. W. CHEREREJUDGEAppearancesCourt Assistants - Kinoti/Munene1st Petitioner - Present in person2nd Petitioner - Present in person3rd Petitioner - Present in personFor DPP - Ms. Rotich (PC- 1)