[2025] KEHC 9284 (KLR)
The court held that section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code requires that any period spent in custody prior to sentencing must be considered when computing the term of imprisonment. The trial court failed to make such a direction, and this omission warranted revision. The High Court found the application...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEHC 9284 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Collins Ochieng Ongana; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kisumu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Miscellaneous Application E242 of 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Sentence Revision
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Judges
- A Mabeya
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Procedure, Pre Sentence Custody, Sentence Commencement, Revision of Sentence
- 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
Collins Ochieng Ongana
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Sentence Revision
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the period spent in pre-sentence custody should be considered in computing the applicant's sentence as per section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
- 2 Whether the trial court erred by failing to direct that the period spent in custody be taken into account.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code requires that any period spent in custody prior to sentencing must be considered when computing the term of imprisonment. The trial court failed to make such a direction, and this omission warranted revision. The High Court found the application meritorious and ordered that the applicant's sentence should be computed from the date he was first placed in custody, ensuring compliance with statutory requirements and fairness in sentencing.
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- The sentence of 20 years' imprisonment shall be computed from 28/7/2023, the date the applicant was first placed in custody.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
Ongana v Republic (Criminal Miscellaneous Application E242 of 2024) [2025] KEHC 9284 (KLR) (27 June 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 9284 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Kisumu
Criminal Miscellaneous Application E242 of 2024
A Mabeya, J
June 27, 2025
Between
Collins Ochieng Ongana
Applicant
and
Republic
Respondent
Ruling
1. On 28/7/2023, Collins Ochieng Ongana and others were charged with the offence of abduction with intent to confine contrary to section 259 of the Penal Code Cap 63 Laws of Kenya. It was alleged that on 2/7/2023 at Kabuothe area in Nyalenda ‘B’ they abducted Tracy Adhiambo with intent to cause her to be secretly and wrongfully confined.
2. After trial, he was found guilty convicted of the offence and sentenced to a total of 20 years’ imprisonment. The Court did not direct that the period when the applicant was in custody during the trial be taken into consideration in computing the period of imprisonment. The applicant was in custody between 28/7/2023 and 15/4/2024, a period of about 9 months.
3. By a Motion on Notice dated 2/12/2024, the applicant has sought that the provisions of section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code be taken into account in computing the period of his incarceration. The State did not oppose the application.
4. Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code provided that: -“Subject to the provisions of section 38 of the Penal Code (Cap 63) every sentence shall be deemed to commence from, and to include the whole of the day of, the date on which it was pronounced, except where otherwise provided in this Code. Provided that where the person sentenced under subsection (1) has, prior to such sentence, been held in custody, the sentence shall take account of the period spent in custody.”
5. I have considered the entire record. I have also considered the proceedings of the trial Court, the judgment and sentence. Since the trial Court did not direct as stated in the above noted provision, I will revise the sentence in accordance therewith.
6. In this regard, I find the application to be meritorious. I allow the same. I direct that the tabulation of the sentence of 7 years shall commence on 28/7/2023. It is so ordered.
DATED AND DELIVERED AT KISUMU THIS 27TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025. A. MABEYA, FCI ArbJUDGE