https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/11231

Republic v Githinji (Criminal Case E034 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 11231 (KLR) (16 July 2026) (Sentence) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 11231 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the High Court at Nakuru Criminal Case E034 of 2025 JM Nang'ea, J July 16, 2026 Between Republic Prosecution and Geoffrey Githinji Subject Sentence 1.The Subject who is a minor aged 16 or thereabouts pleaded guilty to the lesser offence of Manslaughter Contrary to Section 205 of the Penal Code after initially being charged with Murder Contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the same Code. This was the culmination of plea bargain between the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Subject who is represented by a legal Counsel, pursuant to the provisions of Section 137A of the Criminal Procedure Code. The particulars of the manslaughter charge are that on diverse dates between 25th July 2025 and 26th July 2025 at Nyakiambi area, Molo Sub-County, in Nakuru County the subject unlawfully caused the death of Beth Wanjiku Ng’ang’a. The Subject was found responsible for the death on his own plea of guilty. 2.In his written pre-sentence mitigation submissions, the defence Counsel (Mr Orina) tells the court inter alia that the Subject is a 16 –year old child and the deceased was his mother. He was a Form 3 student at Nyakiambe Secondary School. 3.Urging the court to consider a rehabilitative sentence, Counsel also wants his client to be given credit for entering into the plea bargain thus saving judicial time, as well as the fact that he has no previous criminal records. The court is told that pursuant to Article 53(2) of the constitution, the Children Act and the Judiciary Sentencing Policy Guidelines 2023, the best interests of the child are paramount in a judicial process. Counsel thinks that the objective in sentencing a child ought to be rehabilitation and not retribution. 4.The defence Counsel agrees with the Probation Officer’s observations that the Subject minor seems to be grappling with underlying psychological issues that caused his bizarre conduct of reportedly staying with the body of his deceased mother for a long period after killing her, while going about his normal activities without any bother. Counsel therefore finds common ground with the Probation Officer that the Subject requires rehabilitation at Shikusa Borstal Institution. 5.The Prosecution Counsel (Mr Wakasyaka) acknowledges that the Subject has no previous criminal records but notes from the Probation Officer’s report that the deceased’s relatives are opposed to a non-custodial community based sentence. The court is further urged to take into account the brutal circumstances in which the deceased met his death occasioned by blunt force trauma to the head. Like the deceased’s family of which the Subject is also a part, the Prosecution Counsel also favours a rehabilitative custodial sentence as recommended by the Probation Officer. 6.The Probation Officer’s pre-sentence report dated 9th April 2026 notes that the Subject’s relatives are traumatized by the macabre act and have not forgiven him. They are yet to come to terms with the fact that the Subject unlawfully killed his own mother. It is recommended that the Subject be committed to Shikusa Borstal Institution for psychological counselling 7.I have considered the submissions against the applicable principles of sentencing and the operational Judiciary Sentencing Guidelines 2023. The court is also guided by the Supreme Court’s decision in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & Others V. Republic, Petition No. 15 0f 2015 which requires the court in sentencing to consider various factors including the age, character, remorsefulness and antecedents of an offender. It is noted that the Subject is a child aged 16 and has no criminal antecedents. He voluntarily agreed to enter into the Plea Agreement. 8.Having considered all the relevant factors, I concur with the prosecution Counsel and the Probation Officer that a non-custodial community based sentence like probation or community service is not suitable in the circumstances of this case. While I appreciate the stated mitigating circumstances, the accused perpetrated a vicious attack against his mother attracting a lot of resentment from his siblings. His home and general community environment is not also conducive to his return as per the Probation Officer’s report. He requires psychological counselling and rehabilitation. 9.Doing the best I can in balancing the interests of justice and considering that the Subject is a minor, I commit him to Shikusa Borstal Institution for 3 (three) years for necessary counselling and rehabilitation. 10.Sentence imposed accordingly. RULING DELIVERED THIS 16TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 IN THE PRESENCE OF:J. M. NANG’EA, JUDGE.The Prosecution Counsel, Mr Wakasyaka.The Defence Counsel, Mr Orina.The Subject.The Court Assistant, Jeniffer.