[2020] KEHC 7333 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant was convicted under a repealed provision (Section 140 of the Penal Code) and that the current law (Sexual Offences Act) prescribes a lower minimum sentence for rape. The applicant demonstrated significant rehabilitation, having participated in prison programs and achieved trustee...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEHC 7333 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Njogu Thuku Macharia; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Application 129 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Resentencing Application Ruling
- Outcome
- sentence_reduced
- Judges
- RB Ngetich
- Legal Topics
- Rape Sentencing, Resentencing Application, Rehabilitation in Prison, Sexual Offences Act, Penal Code Repeal
- 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
Njogu Thuku Macharia
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Resentencing Application Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to resentencing following the repeal of Section 140 of the Penal Code by the Sexual Offences Act.
- 2 Whether the applicant's demonstrated rehabilitation and time served justify a reduction of sentence.
- 3 What is the appropriate sentence under the current law for the offence committed.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant was convicted under a repealed provision (Section 140 of the Penal Code) and that the current law (Sexual Offences Act) prescribes a lower minimum sentence for rape. The applicant demonstrated significant rehabilitation, having participated in prison programs and achieved trustee status. The court considered the period already served and the applicant's positive conduct in prison. Balancing the seriousness of the offence, the period served, and the applicant's reformation, the court held that a reduction of sentence to 15 years imprisonment, to run from the date of conviction, was appropriate and just in the circumstances.
Court Disposition
sentence_reduced
Orders
- Sentence reduced to 15 years imprisonment.
- Sentence to run from the date of conviction by the trial court.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
31 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NAKURU
MISC.APPL NO.129 OF 2018
NJOGU THUKU MACHARIA....................................................PETITIONER
-VERSUS-
REPUBLIC.................................................................................RESPONDENT
RULING
1. This is a ruling on application for resentencing. The applicant was charged and convicted of the offence of Rape Contrary to Section 40 of the Penal Code (Repealed) and sentenced to 30 years imprisonment. The officer in charge Naivasha Maximum Security Prison in his recommendation letter stated that the applicant had served 12 years in prison as at 19th July 2019 when he wrote the letter.
2. The recommendation letter indicate that the applicant has taken advantage of the rehabilitation program offered and joined carpentry section and that he is able to work with minimum supervision and has been promoted to trustee status; that he has also undergone a course in upholstery and acquired grade III,III and III. The offer in charge indicate that he has embraced correctional core value of reformation and rehabilitation.
3. The applicant submitted that he has served 14 years
4. In response the state counsel submitted that the trial court’s sentence be uphold on ground that it was intended to deter and the trial court took account of relevant factors in respect to welfare of the victim.
5. State counsel further submitted that the applicant has served 12 years as per recommendation letter by officer in charge Naivasha Maximum Security Prison contrary to applicant’s submission that he has served 14 years.
ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION
6. From the recommendation letter by officer in charge Naivasha Maximum Security Prison, the applicant has reformed. He stated that the applicant had served 14 years as at 19th July 2019.
7. I note that the applicant was charged under Section 140 of Penal Codewhich was repealed by Sexual Offence Act. Sexual Offence Act provide for the offence of Rape under Section 3 of the Act. Sentence provided under Sexual Offence Act for rape is 10 years imprisonment, which can be enhanced to life imprisonment.
8. From the lower court record, the applicant pleaded guilty to the charge on 14th August 2006. He never said anything in mitigation. From the record, the trial court noted that the offence was carried out in the most heinous manner.
9. I however note that the applicant has been in prison for considerable period and must have had time to reflect on his action.
10. I also note that, he positively embraced correction in prison and has undertaken trainings, which will enable him, engage in gainful activities out of prison.
11. In view of the above, I am inclined to reduce the sentence to 15 years imprisonment.
12. FINAL ORDER
1. Sentence reduced to 15 years imprisonment
2. Sentence to run from the date he was convicted by the trial court
Ruling dated, signed and delivered at Nakuru this 20th day of February. 2020
.....................................
RACHEL NGETICH
JUDGE
IN THE PRESENCE OF:
Schola – Court Assistant
Rita for State
Accused in person