[2024] KEHC 2596 (KLR)
The court held that it had already determined a resentencing application in Petition No. 39 of 2019, where the applicant's death sentence was substituted with life imprisonment. As such, the court was functus officio and lacked jurisdiction to entertain a further application for resentencing on the same matter. The...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEHC 2596 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Jacob Kiplangat Ngetich; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kericho
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application E060 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Resentencing Application
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- JK Sergon
- Legal Topics
- Resentencing, Mandatory Sentences, Life Imprisonment, Constitutional Rights, Abuse of Process
- 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
Jacob Kiplangat Ngetich
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Resentencing Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the High Court can review a life imprisonment sentence previously substituted from a death sentence after a prior resentencing application has been determined.
- 2 Whether the application for further resentencing is an abuse of court process.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that it had already determined a resentencing application in Petition No. 39 of 2019, where the applicant's death sentence was substituted with life imprisonment. As such, the court was functus officio and lacked jurisdiction to entertain a further application for resentencing on the same matter. The court found that the instant application amounted to an abuse of the court process and dismissed it. The court also noted that the prosecution did not oppose the application, but this did not affect the outcome given the procedural bar to reconsidering the matter.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application for review of the life imprisonment sentence is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
Ngetich v Republic (Miscellaneous Criminal Application E060 of 2023) [2024] KEHC 2596 (KLR) (13 March 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 2596 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Kericho
Miscellaneous Criminal Application E060 of 2023
JK Sergon, J
March 13, 2024
Between
Jacob Kiplangat Ngetich
Applicant
and
Republic
Respondent
Ruling
1. The Applicant was charged and convicted for the offence of murder contrary to section 203 as read with section 204 of the Penal Code in the High Court Criminal Case No. 13 of 2008 at Kericho and sentenced to death on 30th July, 2010. The Applicant being dissatisfied with the decision of the trial Court, appealed to the Court of Appeal. Subsequently, the appeal against both conviction and sentence was dismissed and the death sentence upheld.
2. The Applicant lodged a resentencing petition to the High Court at Kericho vide Petition No. 39 of 2019 whereby the death sentence was substituted with life imprisonment.
3. The Applicant therefore filed the instant application seeking to have this court review the death sentence imposed by the trial Court and confirmed by the Court of Appeal and later commuted to life imprisonment to a more lenient sentence pursuant to article 50 (2) (p) (q) of the Constitution and the Supreme Court decision in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & Another v Republic (2017) eKLR which declared the mandatory nature of the death sentence as unconstitutional and consequently allowed those aggrieved to lodge resentencing applications to the High Court.
4. The applicant contended that he was initially sentenced to a mandatory sentence as prescribed by section 204 of the Penal Code without consideration of mitigation or the unique facts and circumstances of his case. The Applicant conceded that the death sentence was subsequently substituted to a life imprisonment. However, in support of the instant application he cited the Court of Appeal case of Manyeso v Republic (Criminal Appeal 12 of 2001 )[2023] KECA 827 (KLR) (7 July, 2023) (Judgment) which declared life sentences as unconstitutional.
5. The Applicant was also seeking to have the time spent in custody be computed into the eventual sentence awarded pursuant to section 333 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code and the decision of Odunga J (as he then was) in Vincent Sila Jona & 87 Others v Kenya Prison Service & 2 Others (Petition 15 of 2020) [2021] KEHC 457 (KLR) which espoused Court to consider the time spent in custody pursuant to section 333 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
6. The prosecution did not oppose the application.
7. The following legal provisions empower this court to entertain re-sentencing application under Article 165 of the Constitution which clothes the High Court with jurisdiction to hear and determine applications for redress of a denial, violation or infringement of or threat to, a right or fundamental freedom in the Bill of rights as well as Article 50 (2) (p) (q) as read with Article 50 (6) (a) and (b) of the Constitution.
8. I have considered the instant application for review of the life imprisonment sentence, that was meted out to the applicant and the recent Court of Appeal decision in the case of Julius Kitsao Manyeso v Republic [2020] eKLR where it was held that the imposition of a mandatory indeterminate life sentence, was discriminatory, inhumane and a violation of the right to human dignity. It should be noted that the instant application is not an Appeal. The applicant is seeking for re-sentencing. An Application for re-sentencing was heard and determined by the High Court in Petition No.39 of 2019 whereby the death sentence imposed was reviewed and substituted by Life Imprisonment. This Court having considered a similar application is entered funtus officio. The Court cannot go back and consider the same. The instant application amounts to an abuse of the Court process. This application is ordered dismissed.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT KERICHO THIS 13TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024. J.K. SERGONJUDGEIn the presence of:-C/Assistant - RutohProsecutor – Mr. MusyokiApplicant – Not present