[2019] KEHC 12022 (KLR)
The court held that following the Supreme Court's decision in Muruatetu, the mandatory death sentence under Section 296(2) of the Penal Code could not stand. The court was therefore required to resentence the petitioner. In considering the gravity of the offence, the manner in which it was committed, and the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEHC 12022 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Peter Kariuki Mburu; Respondent: Director of Public Prosecutions
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Mombasa
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Petition 217 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Constitutional Petition / Judgment
- Outcome
- petition partly allowed; petitioner resentenced
- Judges
- DO Ogembo
- Legal Topics
- Mandatory Sentencing, Death Penalty, Resentencing, Robbery With Violence, Fundamental Rights, Penal Code Interpretation
- 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
Peter Kariuki Mburu
Appellant
Director of Public Prosecutions
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the mandatory death sentence under Section 296(2) of the Penal Code is unconstitutional.
- 2 Whether the petitioner is entitled to resentencing following the Supreme Court decision in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & Another v Republic [2017] eKLR.
- 3 What is the appropriate sentence for the petitioner given the circumstances of the offence and mitigation.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that following the Supreme Court's decision in Muruatetu, the mandatory death sentence under Section 296(2) of the Penal Code could not stand. The court was therefore required to resentence the petitioner. In considering the gravity of the offence, the manner in which it was committed, and the petitioner's mitigation, the court found that the crime was particularly grave as the petitioner and his accomplice abused the complainant's hospitality before robbing her with violence. The court emphasized the need to send a deterrent message to would-be offenders. Taking all factors into account, the court resentenced the petitioner to 22 years' imprisonment from the date of...
Court Disposition
petition partly allowed; petitioner resentenced
Orders
- The petitioner is sentenced to 22 years' imprisonment from the date of conviction.
- Right of appeal within 14 days.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
26 paragraphs
THE REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA
CONSTITUTIONAL AND HUMAN RIGHTS DIVISION
PETITION NO. 217 OF 2018
PETER KARIUKI MBURU................................................................PETITIONER
VERSUS
THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS........................RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
1. The Petitioner herein was charged and convicted with Robbery with Violence contrary to Section 296 (2) of the Penal Code in Kiambu Chief Magistrate’s Court Criminal Case No. 411 of 2008 and sentenced to death. The Petitioner subsequently lodged a first appeal before the High Court and a second appeal in the Court of Appeal.
2. Brief facts of the case are that on 20th January, 2008 at about 7:15 p.m the Petitioner in the company of another person not known to the complainant, visited the complainant at her home in Kangondo Village in Kiambu County who welcomed them assuming they had come to settle his two months arrears which he owed and upon being served tea and supper, they both turned against the Complainant drawing a machete and demanding money from the complainant and threatening to chop off her head. That the two robbed her of Kshs. 12, 340, a Nokia Phone, a Sony TV, A Philips DVD Player, Cassettes and remote controls.
3. The Petitioner now claims that the sentencing to death by the trial court as well as the two appellate courts was an infringement of his fundamental rights. The Petitioner avers that the said courts interpreted the provisions of Section 296(2) of the Penal Code to mean that death sentence was the only sentence available to the Petitioner and that the said courts held the view that the death sentence under the said provisions was mandatory and no other sentence was tenable.
Hearing and Submissions
4. The matter came up for hearing on 24th September, 2019.
5. It was the Petitioner’s submissions that he was convicted since 2008 when he was 42 years and has been in prison for 10 years. That he has a wife and a child to whom he would wish to go back. That further he suffers from T.B since 16th September, 2009 and fractured ribs as a result of the illness.
6. The Respondent (DPP) through its Counsel Mr. Fedha submitted that the Petitioner should be jailed for 18 years since he has already served 10 years.
The Determination
7. On the issue of sentence, the Supreme Court case in the case of Francis Karioko Muruatetu & Another -vs- Republic [2017] eKLRdeclared the mandatory nature of the death sentence as provided for under Section 204 of the Penal Code to be unconstitutional. To that extent this court only has to resentence the Petitioner.
8. I have perused the Petitioner’s Progress Report. I have also considered Petitioner’s mitigation. The crime that was committed by the Petitioner is very grave. They also had the audacity to be fed by the Complainant then turn around and rob her. This Court must send a clear warning to would be robbers that they would not escape the full force of the Law. I accordingly jail the Petitioner for a total of 22 Years from the date of Conviction.
9. Right of Appeal within 14 days.
Dated, Signed and Delivered in Mombasa this 28th day of November, 2019.
E. K. O. OGOLA
JUDGE
In the Presence of:
Mr. Fedha for DPP
Petitioner in Person.
Mr. Kaunda- Court Assistant