[2019] KEHC 4139 (KLR)
The High Court found that the trial court did not take into account the appellant's status as a first offender when imposing sentence. After weighing the mitigating factors—including the appellant's remorse, family responsibilities, and first offender status—against the aggravating factors of permanent injuries...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEHC 4139 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Rashid Benyea Wanyonyi; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Bungoma
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 119 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- sentence reduced
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Principles, Grievous Harm, Mitigation and Aggravation, First Offender Status
- 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
Rashid Benyea Wanyonyi
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence of six years imprisonment for grievous harm was manifestly excessive.
- 2 Whether the trial court failed to consider the appellant's status as a first offender in sentencing.
- 3 Whether mitigating and aggravating factors were properly balanced in determining sentence.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court found that the trial court did not take into account the appellant's status as a first offender when imposing sentence. After weighing the mitigating factors—including the appellant's remorse, family responsibilities, and first offender status—against the aggravating factors of permanent injuries inflicted on the complainant, the court concluded that the sentence of six years was manifestly excessive. The sentence was therefore reduced to three years imprisonment, which the appellant is to serve.
Court Disposition
sentence reduced
Orders
- The sentence of six years imprisonment is set aside and substituted with a sentence of three years imprisonment to be served by the appellant.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT BUNGOMA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 119 OF 2018
RASHID BENYEA WANYONYI....................APPELLANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC....................................................RESPONDENT
(Being case No. 277 of 2018 of the Senior Principal Magistrate’s Court at Kimilili)
J U D G M E N T
The Appellant has appealed against his sentence of six (6) years imprisonment in respect of the offence of grievous harm contrary to section 234 of Penal Code (Cap 63) Laws of Kenya.
The state has supported the sentence.
In this court the appellant has raised four (4) grounds of appeal.
In ground 1, he has stated that he is a 1st offender, which is an unchallengeable fact.
In ground 2, he has stated that he is remorseful.
In ground 3 he has stated that the sentence imposed upon him is harsh and unsafe. In ground 4, he has drawn the attention of court that he should be given copies of the proceedings to enable him adduce more grounds during the hearing of his appeal.
It is clear from the foregoing that the appeal is only against sentence. In his written submissions in this court he has repeated the same matters that he raised in his grounds of appeal. However, he has added the following matters. He has stated that the matter arose out of misunderstanding that was to be resolved under customary law, but the investigating officer did not give him proper direction. He has also stated that he has now reformed and has asked for forgiveness.
Furthermore, the appellant has stated that he is the sole bread winner of his family and he supports ten (10) member of his family including paying for their school fees. All these matters were in support of his mitigation.
The aggravating factors include the following. The appellant caused permanent injuries to his wife who lost one tooth and another one was broken. Additionally, the right eye of the complainant has permanently been injured. Finally, he attacked his wife with kicks and blows and continued to assault her, when she was lying down.
In his notes on sentence, the trial court has not taken into account that the appellant was a first offender.
After taking into account the mitigating and aggravating factors, I find that the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive. I therefore reduce it to three (3) years imprisonment which now the appellant has to serve.
Judgment signed, dated and delivered at Bungoma this 9th day of August, 2019 in the presence of the appellant and Ms Nyakibia for the Respondent.
J. M. Bwonwong’a.
J U D G E
9th August, 2019.