[2025] KEHC 2075 (KLR)

[2025] KEHC 2075 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant had previously sought similar relief in Nakuru Misc. Criminal Application No. E083 of 2023, which was dismissed, and that no new issues or circumstances had been presented to warrant a review of the sentence. However, the court noted that section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] KEHC 2075 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Peter Momanyi Okari; Respondent: Republic
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nakuru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Criminal Miscellaneous Application E132 of 2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Review of Sentence
Outcome
application dismissed with modification of commencement date of sentence
Judges
HI Ong'udi
Legal Topics
Sentence Review, Defilement Offence, Sexual Offences Act, Application of Section 333 2 Cpc
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Sentence Review Defilement Offence Sexual Offences Act Application of Section 333 2 Cpc

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Momanyi Okari

Applicant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Review of Sentence

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to a review of his sentence of 22 years imprisonment for defilement.
  2. 2 Whether section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code should be applied to the applicant's sentence.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had previously sought similar relief in Nakuru Misc. Criminal Application No. E083 of 2023, which was dismissed, and that no new issues or circumstances had been presented to warrant a review of the sentence. However, the court noted that section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code had not been applied at any stage of the proceedings. Consequently, while the application for review was dismissed for lack of merit, the court ordered that the applicant's sentence of 22 years imprisonment should run from 15th February, 2016, the date he was first arraigned in court, in compliance with section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with modification of commencement date of sentence

Orders

  • The application for review of sentence is dismissed.
  • The sentence of 22 years imprisonment shall run from 15th February, 2016, the date the applicant was first arraigned in court.