Republic v Keverenge alias Brian Mavundi (Criminal Case 29 of 2020) [2026] KEHC 12265 (KLR) (30 July 2026) (Sentence)

REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KIAMBU CRIMINAL CASE NO. 29 OF 2020 REPUBLIC ……………….…………....…………..……..…..PROSECUTION VERSUS KEVIN KEVERENGE alias BRIAN MAVUNDI ……...……..….ACCUSED The Charge SENTENCE 1. KEVIN KEVERENGE, the Accused herein, was charged with Murder contrary to Section 203 as read together with Section 204 of the Penal Code. The particulars of the stated offence are that:- “ On 22nd July 2020 at Gwatikira in Ndenderu Location within Kiambu County the Accused Person murdered one VICTOR ANDALI AMBULULI. 2. The Accused pleaded not guilty and the plea was duly entered. Plea-Bargaining Agreement (PBA) 3. The Prosecution and the Defence entered into a Plea-Bargaining Agreement (PBA) dated 14th April 2026. It was signed by the Accused, Learned Defence Counsel – Ms. Vicky Kimathi, and the Learned Prosecution Counsel – Ms. Caroline Muriu. Consequently, on 22nd April 2026 the Accused pleaded guilty to the offence of Manslaughter HCCR. CASE NO.29 OF 2020 RULING ON SENTENCE - Page 1 of 9 contrary to Section 202 as read with Section 205 of the Penal Code. The PBA was availed in Court together with Court’s compliance form for recording the Plea Agreement and the Deceased’s post- mortem report dated 27th July /2020. 4. After taking him through the applicable law, this Court was satisfied that the Accused Person understood his rights identified under Section 137F of the Criminal Procedure Code as signified by his signature on the Court Form. Consequently, the Plea Agreement was adopted as part of the Court Record. 5. Accordingly, the Accused Person was convicted for the offence of Manslaughter contrary to Section 202 as read with Section 205 of the Penal Code on his own plea of guilty. Under Section 205 of the Penal Code, the punishment for Manslaughter is imprisonment for life. Mitigation – 11 th June 2026 6. In mitigation, Defence Counsel noted that the Accused Person is remorseful and that his actions that led to the loss of the Deceased’s life were not intentional. Ms. Kimathi stated that the Accused Person wishes to apologize to the family of the Deceased, to his own family, and to all other affected persons. 7. Ms. Kimathi underscored that the incident was not pre-meditated and the Accused Person was attempting to wrest the ‘Panga’ (machete) from the Deceased. In the course of this act of self-defence, the HCCR. CASE NO.29 OF 2020 RULING ON SENTENCE - Page 2 of 9 Deceased was pierced with the machete and lost his life. Ms. Kimathi noted that the Deceased had armed himself with the machete and numerous prosecution witnesses had agreed that the Deceased had gone to the Accused Person’s house while armed with the machete and with the intention to harm the Accused Person. 8. Defence Counsel highlighted that the Accused Person immediately went to the Police, self-reported, and fully cooperated with law enforcement. Ms. Kimathi further observed that the Accused is a first- offender who has already spent a little over 6 years in custody, having been arrested on 23rd July 2020. 9. Ms. Kimathi concluded by submitting that the Accused Person is a youth, who is remorseful, rehabilitated, and deserving of a second opportunity at life. Ms. Kimathi proposes a sentence of time served. Response to Mitigation 10. In response to the mitigation, the Prosecution Counsel confirmed that the Accused Person is a first offender with no previous records. Ms. Muriu observed that by entering into a Plea Bargain at an early stage, the Accused Person had saved the Family a lengthy and emotionally draining full trial in which family members would have to testify. She further noted that the same conserved scarce judicial time and resources. 11. Ms. Muriu urged the Court to consider the circumstances of the case. HCCR. CASE NO.29 OF 2020 RULING ON SENTENCE - Page 3 of 9 While not opposing a non-custodial sentence, Prosecution Counsel drew the Court’s gaze to Page 3 of the Probation Pre-Sentence Report dated 11th May 2026, and proposed a sentence of 8 years commencing from the date of arrest, with the remaining period of that sentence to be served non-custodially. Personal Statement in Mitigation 12. The Accused Person, in rejoinder and giving his personal statement in mitigation, sought the forgiveness of the Deceased’s family and leniency from the Court. He stated it was accidental and he was defending himself. 13. After expressing his remorse for the offence, the Accused Person stated that if released he would not reoffend and would work hard to take care of his disabled mother. The Probation Pre-Sentence Report (PPSR) 14. The Probation Pre-Sentence Report dated 11th May 2026 was positive. It noted the tremendous pain and trauma caused to the Victim’s family while at the same time observing that the Convicted Offender presents as a person who may benefit from structured rehabilitation and reintegration support. Summary of the Key Facts of the case HCCR. CASE NO.29 OF 2020 RULING ON SENTENCE - Page 4 of 9 15. The agreed key facts of the case as presented by the Prosecution and accepted by the Accused Person are as follows: a) On 22th July 2020, at around 9:50PM, the Accused Person was at home. His house had no electricity as he had fallen back on payments but he was using a battery- powered radio and was playing music loudly. The Deceased knocked on the Accused Person’s door and asked him to stop playing loud music, claiming that the Accused was doing so while also not working hard enough to be able to pay for electricity. b) The Deceased then left but came back shortly thereafter. The Deceased knocked on the Accused Person’s door while carrying a ‘Panga’ (machete) under his arm. He then sought to attack the Accused Person. The Accused Person tried to wrest the same away from the Deceased but in the process it pierced the Deceased. The Deceased then ran away. c) The Accused Person then picked up the ‘Panga’ and reported the incident to Rweno Police Station under OB 19/22/7/2020, a case of assault. The Panga was retained as an exhibit by the Police, though it had no blood stains. d) While the Accused Person was away reporting to the Police, the Deceased ,who had been injured and ran away, succumbed to his injuries a distance away at the gate of the compound. e) After making his report to the Police, the Accused Person did not return home but instead went on a night out. When he retuned home, he was attacked by an irate HCCR. CASE NO.29 OF 2020 RULING ON SENTENCE - Page 5 of 9 mob, and he lost consciousness. He regained consciousness to find himself at Karuri Police Station where he was informed that Deceased had passed away as a result of the Accused’s actions. f) The Post-Mortem Report dated 27th July 2020 stated that the Deceased died due to " exsanguination due to severe musculo-vascular injuries due to sharp force trauma consistent with assault.” g) The Accused Person was initially charged with the offence of Murder, which has now been reduced to Manslaughter. Analysis and Determination 16. The court in this matter is guided by the provisions of the Judiciary Sentencing Policy Guidelines 2023 as amended by the directions of the Supreme Court in the case of Muruatetu & Another –vs- Republic; Katiba Institute & 5 Others (Amicus Curiae) (Petition 15 & 16 of 2015 (Consolidated)) [2017] KESC 2 (KLR). 17. Under Section 205 of the Penal Code, the accused is liable face a punishment of life imprisonment. In April 2025, the Supreme Court held that a life imprisonment sentence is lawful and applicable. This was the finding in the cases of Republic –vs- Ayako (Petition E002 of 2024) [2025] KESC 20 (KLR) (Ayako case) and Republic –vs- Manyeso (Petition E013 of 2024) [2025] KESC 16 (KLR) (Manyeso case) where it was held that only Parliament has the power to revise a sentence prescribed under a statute. HCCR. CASE NO.29 OF 2020 RULING ON SENTENCE - Page 6 of 9 18. In light of the foregoing discussion, this Court can exercise its discretion on sentencing given the circumstances of the case. The Prosecution is proposing an 8-year sentence to run from the date of arrest, with the remaining term to be served non-custodially under probation. 19. The Defence on the other hand proposes a sentence of ‘time served’ noting that the Accused Person has been in custody continuously from 23rd July 2020 when he was arrested. 20. Guided by Paragraphs 5.2.5 to 5.2.7 of the Sentencing Policy Guidelines 2023, I am satisfied that the homicide herein was on the lower end of manslaughter and without any aggravating factors. Indeed, it is an agreed fact between the Prosecution and the Defence that it was the Deceased who brought the homicide weapon to the scene, ostensibly with the intention to do harm to the Accused Person. 21. It is also agreed between the Prosecution and Defence that the fatal injuries that the Deceased suffered were sustained and occurred during a struggle between the Accused and the Deceased for control of the homicide weapon. Without a full trial, and hearing from the Accused Person, it may not be possible to establish satisfactorily if this was or was not a case of self-defence in its truest form. However, it has been established who brought the weapon to the scene and who was the initial aggressor. These are special mitigating factors. HCCR. CASE NO.29 OF 2020 RULING ON SENTENCE - Page 7 of 9 22. A life was lost. The Accused Person pleaded guilty to manslaughter based on the facts outlined. The sentence that follows seeks to give a justice effect to those two aspects. Disposition 23. In the result, I hereby sentence the Accused to imprisonment for a term of six (6) years commencing on 23rd July 2020 when he was arrested, for the offence of manslaughter on his own plea of guilty. 24. In the result, the Accused Person’s sentence is now fully served. The Accused Person is to be immediately set at liberty unless otherwise lawfully detained, with the best wishes of the Court for a happy and prosperous life without any further conflict with the law. 25. Orders Accordingly. File Closed Accordingly. DATED, SIGNED, AND DELIVERED AT KIAMBU ON THIS 30TH DAY OF JULY 2026 ______________________________________ BAHATI MWAMUYE MBS JUDGE Delivered in the presence of: 1. Accused Present in Court 2. Ms. Caroline Muriu – Prosecution Counsel HCCR. CASE NO.29 OF 2020 RULING ON SENTENCE - Page 8 of 9 3. Ms. Vicky Kimathi - Defence Counsel 4. Mr. Martin Mwenda - Court Assistant HCCR. CASE NO.29 OF 2020 RULING ON SENTENCE - Page 9 of 9