Republic v John Githenye Kamau [2021] KEHC 2872 (KLR)
- Citation
- [2021] KEHC 2872 (KLR)
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Court
- High Court
- Panel
- RM Mwongo
- Case number
- Criminal Case 18 of 2017
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- High Court
- Panel
- RM Mwongo
- Case number
- Criminal Case 18 of 2017
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court found that the applicant had maintained exemplary conduct and demonstrated significant rehabilitation during his incarceration, as evidenced by the positive report from the Prison Service. The original sentencing order expressly provided for a review of sentence after forty-two months if the accused maintained good conduct. The court considered the statutory remission provisions, which would have allowed the applicant to be released after serving two-thirds of his sentence. In light of the applicant's reformation, remorse, and the absence of any adverse conduct, the court exercised its discretion to review and reduce the sentence, ordering the applicant's early release. The court also noted that the pending miscellaneous application for sentence review was overtaken by this ruling, and both files were closed.
Court disposition
sentence reviewed and reduced; applicant to be released on specified date
Orders
- The applicant's sentence is reviewed and the unserved balance is voided; he shall be released on 19th October, 2021 unless otherwise lawfully held.
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application No. E134 of 2021 is overtaken by events and closed.
- Both the application file and the murder file are closed.
- A copy of this order shall be placed on the Miscellaneous file.
02
Material facts
Parties
Republic
RespondentJohn Githenye Kamau
ApplicantAmounts and remedies
- Original Sentence (years): 7
- Remission Period (years): 2.33
03
Procedural history
Posture
Criminal Case / Sentence Review Ruling
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the applicant's sentence for manslaughter should be reviewed based on his conduct and rehabilitation while in prison.
- 02
Whether the conditions set out in the original sentencing order for sentence review have been satisfied.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicant sought a review of his seven-year sentence for manslaughter, relying on his good conduct, participation in rehabilitation programs, and positive prison report indicating he is reformed, remorseful, skilled, and disciplined. He argued that these factors justified a reduction of his sentence and early release.
- Respondent
- The respondent did not oppose the application and participated in the teleconference hearing. The prison service provided a report confirming the applicant's good conduct and rehabilitation, supporting the review of the sentence.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Prisons Act (Kenya); Original Sentencing Order in HCCRC No. 18 of 2017
A court may review a sentence if the offender demonstrates good conduct and rehabilitation during incarceration, as provided in the original sentencing order and under the Prisons Act regarding remission.
- 02
Prisons Act (Kenya)
Remission of sentence allows for reduction of up to one third of the term for good conduct, subject to statutory and judicial discretion.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court found that the applicant had maintained exemplary conduct and demonstrated significant rehabilitation during his incarceration, as evidenced by the positive report from the Prison Service. The original sentencing order expressly provided for a review of sentence after forty-two months if the accused maintained good conduct. The court considered the statutory remission provisions, which would have allowed the applicant to be released after serving two-thirds of his sentence. In light of the applicant's reformation, remorse, and the absence of any adverse conduct, the court exercised its discretion to review and reduce the sentence, ordering the applicant's early release. The court also noted that the pending miscellaneous application for sentence review was overtaken by this ruling, and both files were closed.
Obiter and limits
- It is apt that the offender should spend Mashujaa Day with his family, marking his reformation and reintegration into society.
- The judgment was delivered via teleconference due to COVID-19 restrictions, with parties' consent retained as part of the court record.
Court disposition
sentence reviewed and reduced; applicant to be released on specified date
- The applicant's sentence is reviewed and the unserved balance is voided; he shall be released on 19th October, 2021 unless otherwise lawfully held.
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application No. E134 of 2021 is overtaken by events and closed.
- Both the application file and the murder file are closed.
- A copy of this order shall be placed on the Miscellaneous file.
Source and reliance status
High Court
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
High Court
Judgment
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIVASHA
CORAM: R. MWONGO, J
HIGH COURT CRIMINAL CASE NO. 18 OF 2017
REPUBLIC..............................................PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
JOHN GITHENYE KAMAU.........................ACCUSED
RULING ON DIRECTIONS
1. The applicant has filed a review of his sentence for manslaughter wherein he was sentenced to seven (7) years imprisonment by this court. The court’s sentencing order included the following provision:
“15) In the circumstances, I sentence the accused to imprisonment for seven (7) years commencing from the date of his arrest and incarceration on the following conditions:
a) The Prisons Service shall maintain a detailed record of the accused’s life and conduct whilst in prison which shall be availed to the court after the lapse of his first forty-two (42) months of incarceration, to determine whether the sentence shall be reviewed.
b) If the accused is involved in any criminal activities whilst serving sentence, the review mentioned in a) above shall be revoked.”
2. Following the Court’s Order, the Prison’s service has filed its Report dated 4th August 2021. The report states:
“As per his prison records. I wish to inform the court as follows:
Rehabilitation program: The accused has achieved a lot in handcraft (beadwork) activities, hobbies, carpentry and masonry.
Conclusion: The above named accused is a reformed, remorseful, skilled and disciplined person aged (43) years.
He will be self-reliant upon his release. In respect of the above, any assistance accorded to the said accused is highly recommended.”
3. In light of the above Report, the offender has maintained good conduct which justifies, in my view a review of his sentence. I take note of the fact that his sentence of 7 years commencing October, 2017 would in the event that he is granted remission of one third (1/3) of his term under the Prisons Act, mean he is to serve a sentence expiring after completion of 4 years and eight months. That would be in June, 2022.
4. Accordingly, I hereby review the accused’s sentence to void the unserved balance of the term to the effect that he shall be released on 19th October, 2021 unless otherwise lawfully held. As 20th October is Mashujaa Day, it is apt that the offender should spend that day with his family.
5. It is further noted that the accused has also filed a sentence review application namely Miscellaneous Criminal Application No. E134 of 2021, seeking the review proposed in the judgment. That application having been disposed of herein, the Miscellaneous file is hereby overtaken by events. A copy of this order shall be placed on the Miscellaneous file.
6. The application file and this murder file are hereby both closed.
Administrative directions
7. Due to the current inhibitions on movement nationally, and in keeping with social distancing requirements decreed by the state due to the Corona-virus pandemic, this Judgment has been rendered through Teams tele-conference with the consent of the parties noted hereunder, who were also able to participate in the conference. Accordingly, a signed copy of this judgment shall be scanned and availed to the parties and relevant authorities as evidence of the delivery thereof, with the High Court seal duly affixed thereon by the Executive Officer, Naivasha.
8. A printout of the parties’ written consent to the delivery of this judgment shall be retained as part of the record of the Court.
9. Orders accordingly.
DATED AND DELIVERED IN NAIVASHA BY TELECONFERENCE THIS 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021.
R. MWONGO
JUDGE
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.