https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/11695

Gitari v Republic (Miscellaneous Criminal Application E078 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 11695 (KLR) (27 July 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 11695 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the High Court at Chuka Miscellaneous Criminal Application E078 of 2025 RL Korir, J July 27, 2026 Between Nanys Kananu Gitari Applicant and Republic Respondent Ruling 1.The Applicant Nanys Kananu Gitari was charged with the offence of issuing a bad cheque contrary to section 316 A (1) (a) (4) of the Penal Code. The particulars were on the 30th day of January, 2020 at Chuka township within Tharaka Nithi County, jointly with others not before court, issued a cheque No.1361 of Kshs.531,177/- (five hundred and thirty one thousand, seven hundred and seven one shillings) in favor of Jumbo Steel Mills Limited Account No.501010431200 with knowledge that the said account No. 501010431200 domiciled at Southern Star Sacco Chuka branch had insufficient funds. 2.Upon trial the Applicant was convicted on all six counts and sentenced as follows:- Count 1- One year imprisonment. Count 2- One year imprisonment Count 3- One year imprisonment Count 4- One year imprisonment Count 5- Three years imprisonment Count 6- Three years imprisonment Sentences to run concurrently. 3.The Applicant has now approached this court seeking to have her sentence revised. 4.In her home-made application dated 27th October 2025, the Applicant grounded her application on this court’s revisionary jurisdiction and the Judiciary Sentencing Guidelines. 5.She stated in the supporting affidavit that she was aged 35 years and had two minor children and had her younger child accompanying her in prison while the other was with her sickly mother at home. That she had been in prison custody for 3 years and had acquired a skill in tailoring and dressmaking. Further that she was remorseful and transformed having undergone rehabilitative programs in prison. 6.In written submissions dated 9th March 2026, the Applicant stated that she was remorseful, had reformed and prayed for a reduction of her sentence. She also submitted that she was a first offender and had already spent 2 years in prison. 7.The Applicant submitted she was accompanied in prison by her child and that her other minor child who was in the custody of her sickly mother and lacked adequate care. She prayed for a non-custodial sentence in order to meet her parental duties and also take care of her mother. 8.The Respondent filed submissions dated 1st April 2026 opposing the Application. The Respondent submitted that the sentences meted out the Applicant was legal just and fair and the trial court took with consideration that the Applicant was charged with serious crimes. 9.On whether the Applicant’s sentence could be varied into a non-custodial sentence, the Respondent submitted that the offences were serious and a custodial sentence remained appropriate. The Respondent further urged that the sentence as it stood was lenient. Analysis and determination 10.This court’s revisionary power is provided by section 362 of Criminal Procedure Code which provides:-“The High court may call for and examine the record of any criminal proceedings before any subordinate court for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the correctness, legality or propriety of any finding, sentence or order recorded or passed, and as to the regularity of any proceedings of any such subordinate court.” 11.Section 354 of the Criminal Procedure Code empowers the court in a revision to increase, reduce or alter the nature of the sentence. 12.I have considered the Application. The Applicant was convicted of serious crime of forgery and fraud. She was sentence to serve 1 year each in Counts 1, 2, 3 and 4; and to serve 3 years’ each in counts 5 and 6. The court further ordered the sentences to run concurrently meaning that she would in the end serve 3 years’ imprisonment with effect from 20th August 2024. 13.The Applicant prays to be granted a non-custodial sentence for the balance of her prison sentence.I have considered hat the Applicant was accompanied by her child in prison and that she had another minor child at home. I have also considered that she has served more than half of her prison sentence and was sufficiently rehabilitated having acquired skill in tailoring and dressmaking. 14.I have also considered that the probation report had recommended a non-custodial sentence on the basis that the home environment was suitable for her rehabilitation. 15.For the above reasons I am persuaded that the Application was merited. The Applicant is released from prison to serve the balance of her sentence on probation. 16.The release is subject to her not being otherwise lawfully held.Orders accordingly. RULING DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED AT CHUKA THIS 27TH DAY OF JULY, 2026...........................R. LAGAT - KORIRJUDGERuling delivered in the presence of the Applicant at Garissa Women Prison acting in person, Ms Rukunga for the Republic; Muriuki (Court Assistant)