[2020] KEHC 1921 (KLR)
The court considered the gravity of the offence, the circumstances under which it was committed (noting the absence of provocation and the fact that the deceased was the accused's wife), the six years already spent in custody, and the mitigating factors advanced by the defence. Applying the principles from the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEHC 1921 (KLR)
- Parties
- Respondent: Republic; Defendant: Julius Kariuki Mbatia
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 110 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Sentencing Ruling After Plea Bargain and Guilty Plea to Manslaughter
- Outcome
- accused sentenced to three years imprisonment from date of ruling
- Legal Topics
- Manslaughter, Sentencing Guidelines, Plea Bargain, Mitigation, Custodial Sentence
- 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
Republic
Respondent
Julius Kariuki Mbatia
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Sentencing Ruling After Plea Bargain and Guilty Plea to Manslaughter
Legal Issues
- 1 What is the appropriate sentence for the accused who pleaded guilty to manslaughter after a plea bargain agreement.
- 2 How should the court weigh mitigating factors, including time already served and remorsefulness, against the gravity of the offence.
Ratio Decidendi
The court considered the gravity of the offence, the circumstances under which it was committed (noting the absence of provocation and the fact that the deceased was the accused's wife), the six years already spent in custody, and the mitigating factors advanced by the defence. Applying the principles from the Muruatetu case and sentencing guidelines, the court found that while the offence was serious and attracted a potential life sentence, the mitigating factors warranted a lesser custodial sentence. The court exercised its discretion to impose a three-year imprisonment term from the date of the ruling, balancing the need for punishment, deterrence, and the possibility of rehabilitation.
Court Disposition
accused sentenced to three years imprisonment from date of ruling
Orders
- The accused is sentenced to serve three years imprisonment from the date of this ruling.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
41 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAKURU
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 110 OF 2013
REPUBLIC
VERSUS
JULIUS KARIUKI MBATIA..................ACCUSED
RULING ON SENTENCE
1. The accused person, Julius Kariuki Mbatia was initially charged with the offence of Murder of one Janet Njoki Kariuki on the 24/11/2013 at Engoshura Farm Bahati in Nakuru County.
The prosecution case proceeded and closed after six witnesses testified. Before the accused could tender his defence evidence, both the prosecution and the accused entered into a plea bargain upon which an agreement was reached and recorded on the 10/3/2020.
The murder charge was reduced to Manslaughter upon which the accused pleaded guilty on the 10th March 2020.
2. Ms. Daye, Advocate for the accused mitigated on behalf of the accused on the 13/7/2020. The court was urged that the accused was remorseful and that during the custodial time served of approximately six years, the accused had learnt from his mistakes and was willing and ready to be rehabilitated back to the society. A pre-sentence report was prepared but it was not favourable to the accused. The accused urged for a non-custodial sentence.
3. Sentencing is an important task in criminal law and justice. The objectives of criminal law is imposition of an appropriate, adequate, just and proportionate sentence consumerate with the nature and gravity of the crime and the manner in which the crime was committed - The Supreme Court of India in Alister Anthony Pareiva Vs. State of Maharashra (202) 2 S.C 648 Paragraph 69.
4. The court in the above case continued to state that
“What sentence would meet the ends of justice depends on the facts and circumstances of each case and the court must keep the gravity of the crime, motive for the crime, nature of the offence and all other attendant circumstances”.
5. The offence of Manslaughter is defined under Section 202 as read with Section 205 of the Penal Code. It attracts a life sentence upon conviction.
6. I have considered the Judiciary’s guidelines on sentencing as well as principles stated in the Supreme Court decision, popularly known as the “Muruatetu Case” – Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another Vs. Republic; Petition NO. 15 & 16 (consolidated) of 2015 (2017) e KLR.
These are:
· The age of the offender
· Being a first offender
· Whether offender pleaded guilty
· Character and record of the offender
· Commission of offence in response to gender – based violence
· Remorsefulness of the offender
· Possibility of reform and social re-adaptation of the offender
· Any other factor that the court considers relevant
7. Together with the above, I have also considered that sentencing is at the trial court’s discretion and that the above principles are only advisory; as well as the objectives and purpose of sentencing as stated above; being
· Retribution – to punish the offender for his/her criminal conduct in a just manner.
· Deterrence – to enable the offender from committing similar offence subsequently as well as to discourage other people from committing similar offences.
· Rehabilitation– to enable the offender reform from his criminal disposition and become a law abiding person.
· Restorative justice – to address the needs arising from the criminal conduct such as loss and damage and to promote a sense of responsibility through the offender contribution towards meeting the victim’s needs.
· Community protection by incapacitating the offender.
· Denunciation– to communicate to the community’s condemnation of the Criminal conduct.
8. I have taken into account the six years the accused has been in custody as well as the circumstances under which the offence was committed, without no provocation at all from the deceased who was the accused’s wife as well as the mitigating factors.
9. For the reasons set out above, I sentence the accused person to serve three years imprisonment from the date of this ruling.
Orders accordingly.
Delivered, Signed and Dated electronically at Kerugoya this 1st day of October, 2020
J.N. MULWA
HIGH COURT JUDGE.
PARTIES:
Munene Chege & Co. Advocates.
Ms. Odero, State Prosecutor, Nakuru.