[2022] KEHC 2916 (KLR)
The court held that the Supreme Court's clarification in the 2021 Muruatetu directions restricts the application of its 2017 decision to mandatory sentences for murder only. Since the applicant was convicted of robbery with violence under section 296(2) of the Penal Code, the High Court has no jurisdiction to review...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEHC 2916 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Paul Ndeta; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kakamega
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Application 21 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Application / Ruling on Application for Sentence Review
- Outcome
- application dismissed for want of jurisdiction
- Judges
- DN Musyoka
- Legal Topics
- Mandatory Sentencing, 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
Paul Ndeta
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Application / Ruling on Application for Sentence Review
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to review a sentence for robbery with violence based on the Supreme Court decision in Muruatetu.
- 2 Whether the Muruatetu decision on mandatory sentences applies to offences other than murder.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the Supreme Court's clarification in the 2021 Muruatetu directions restricts the application of its 2017 decision to mandatory sentences for murder only. Since the applicant was convicted of robbery with violence under section 296(2) of the Penal Code, the High Court has no jurisdiction to review his sentence on the basis of Muruatetu. The application for sentence review is therefore incompetent and must be dismissed.
Court Disposition
application dismissed for want of jurisdiction
Orders
- The application and petition are dismissed as incompetent.
- The Deputy Registrar shall cause copies of this ruling to be availed to the petitioner and the office of Director of Public Prosecutions, Kakamega.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
15 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT KAKAMEGA
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 21 OF 2018
PAUL NDETA...................................................................................................APPLICANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC.....................................................................................................RESPONDENT
RULING
1. This matter was placed before me for the purpose of giving directions, in view of the recent decision by the Supreme Court in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic; Katiba Institute & 5 others(Amicus Curiae[2021] (Koome CJ&P, Mwilu DCJ&VP, Ibrahim, Wanjala, Ndung’u & Lenaola SSJJ), with respect to mandatory sentences, where it was clarified that the decision, in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic[2017] eKLR (Maraga CJ&P, Mwilu DCJ&VP, Ojwang, Wanjala, Njoki and Lenaola SCJJ), had arisen from proceedings relating to murder, under section 204 of the Penal Code, Cap 63, Laws of Kenya, and the position stated in the said decision was intended to apply only to mandatory sentences with respect to murder cases.
2. The Motion herein, dated 16th April 2018, was filed herein on 12th April 2018,and is principally founded on the decision, in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic[2017] eKLR (Maraga CJ&P, Mwilu DCJ&VP, Ojwang, Wanjala, Njoki and Lenaola SCJJ), for the applicant seeks review of his sentence, where he had been convicted of robbery with violence, contrary to section 296(2) of the Penal Code, in Butali SRMCRCRC No. 123 of 2008, and was sentenced to death. He filed appeals in Kakamega HCCRA No. 74 of 2010 and Kisumu CACRA No. 64 of 2014, which were both dismissed. The death penalty was later commuted to life imprisonment by the President of the Republic of Kenya.
3. The offence, the subject of the instant proceedings, is not murder, but robbery with violence, as defined in Section 296(2) of the Penal Code, the decision in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic[2017] eKLR (Maraga CJ&P, Mwilu DCJ&VP, Ojwang, Wanjala, Njoki and Lenaola SCJJ), therefore, does not apply to it. As a consequence, the High Court has no jurisdiction to review the sentence that was imposed by the trial court, in view of the directions given in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic; Katiba Institute & 5 others(Amicus Curiae[2021] (Koome CJ&P, Mwilu DCJ&VP, Ibrahim, Wanjala, Ndung’u & Lenaola SSJJ). The application and petition are incompetent.
4. The Deputy Registrar shall cause copies of this ruling to be availed to the petitioner and the office of Director of Public Prosecutions, Kakamega.
PREPARED, DATED AND SIGNED AT KAKAMEGA THIS 14TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022
W MUSYOKA
JUDGE