[2024] KEHC 4217 (KLR)
The High Court held that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the application for resentencing because the applicant's conviction and sentence had already been affirmed by the Court of Appeal. Entertaining the application would amount to disregarding the hierarchy of courts and the doctrine of functus officio, as the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEHC 4217 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Francis Kanila Ndanga; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kibera
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application 9 of 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Resentencing Application
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- DR Kavedza
- Legal Topics
- Resentencing, Robbery With Violence, Jurisdiction of High Court
- 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
Francis Kanila Ndanga
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Resentencing Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to resentence the applicant after the Court of Appeal has affirmed the conviction and sentence.
- 2 Whether the application for resentencing constitutes an abuse of court process.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court held that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the application for resentencing because the applicant's conviction and sentence had already been affirmed by the Court of Appeal. Entertaining the application would amount to disregarding the hierarchy of courts and the doctrine of functus officio, as the High Court had already discharged its duty in the matter. The court found that the application was an abuse of process since all avenues of appeal had been exhausted, and the applicant was not entitled to seek resentencing from the High Court after the Court of Appeal's decision.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application for resentencing is dismissed.
- The applicant is directed not to file a similar application unless with the leave of court.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
Ndanga v Republic (Miscellaneous Criminal Application 9 of 2024) [2024] KEHC 4217 (KLR) (29 April 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 4217 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Kibera
Miscellaneous Criminal Application 9 of 2024
DR Kavedza, J
April 29, 2024
Between
Francis Kanila Ndanga
Applicant
and
Republic
Respondent
Ruling
1. The applicant filed a notice of motion application seeking resentencing. The application is supported by an affidavit filed on 30th May 2023 sworn by the applicant. The averments made in support of the application are that is remorseful for the crime committed. He urged the court to resentence him.
2. In his pleadings, the applicant contended that he was charged, convicted and sentenced to death by the Chief Magistrate’s court criminal case no. 2556 of 2005 for the offence of robbery with violence contrary to section 296 (2) of the Penal Code. His appeal to the High Court in High Court High Court Criminal Appeal no. 304 of 2005 was dismissed. Similarly, his appeal to the Court of Appeal being no. 297 of 2007 was also dismissed and the sentence was affirmed. He maintains that the time he has spent in prison is adequate rehabilitation. He urged the court to resentence him.
3. I have considered the application, the affidavit in support and the applicable law. From the record, I note that the matter was already handled by the Court of Appeal. If this court ventures into handling the application on its merits would be tantamount to a disregard for the hierarchy of courts. This court has no jurisdiction to supervise a superior court. As noted above, this court has already discharged its duty and became functus officio. I do not understand why the applicant having exhausted his avenues of appeal has come back to this court unless he is intent on abusing the court process.
4. As a result, the application is dismissed. The applicant is directed not to file a similar application unless with the leave of court.
Orders accordingly.
RULING DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY THIS 29THDAY OF APRIL 2024D. KAVEDZAJUDGE