https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/9077

Republic v Muriithi (Criminal Case 74 of 2023) [2026] KEHC 9077 (KLR) (29 June 2026) (Judgment) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 9077 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the High Court at Kibera Criminal Case 74 of 2023 DR Kavedza, J June 29, 2026 Between Republic Prosecutor and Benson Ndumia Muriithi Accused Judgment 1.The accused was charged with the offence of murder contrary to section 203 as read with section 204 of the Penal Code, cap 63, laws of Kenya. The particulars are that on 19th October 2023, at By, Faith Apartment Ndwaru Road within Dagoretti Sub County he unlawfully killed Doris Ntinyari. 2.However, following successful plea negotiations with the state, the accused pleaded guilty to a lesser charge of manslaughter and signed a plea agreement. The accused was therefore charged with the offence of manslaughter contrary to section 205 of the Penal Code cap 63 Laws of Kenya. 3.The brief facts, as outlined in the plea agreement, are as follows:The facts as presented disclose that the accused and the deceased, Doris, cohabited as a couple at Ayfelte Apartments in Dagoretti Sub-County for approximately six months. The deceased had a five-year-old son, Jayden Munene, from a previous relationship, who resided with them. The evidence shows that the relationship was characterised by frequent domestic disputes. 4.On 19th June 2023, the accused assaulted the deceased by stabbing her. The incident was reported at Kabete Police Station under OB No. 2/19/6/2023. Although the accused was arrested, the deceased later opted to resolve the matter amicably, resulting in no further action. 5.On 18th October 2023 at about 10.00 a.m., the accused and the deceased visited Ocean Bar in Dagoretti, where they consumed alcohol until about 5.00 p.m. They returned to the same establishment at about 8.00 p.m. and continued drinking. Before leaving, the accused gave the bar attendant, Susan Wanjiku, Kshs.1,000 to pay the boda boda rider who had taken him to the bar. Shortly thereafter, the couple quarrelled outside the premises over the money before returning home at about 11.00 p.m., where the disagreement continued. 6.The deceased subsequently left the house and went to Base Bar, where she remained until about 5.00 a.m. on 19th October 2023. She was escorted home by a boda boda rider known as Nganga. Upon arrival, the accused admitted the deceased into the house and locked the door, leaving the rider outside. The rider was heard demanding his mobile phone, which remained with the deceased. From inside the house, the accused was heard threatening to throw the phone into water. 7.The evidence shows that the accused then violently attacked the deceased by strangling her while armed with a knife. A neighbour, Jackson Lolodonde, pleaded with him to open the door. Other neighbours gathered outside and, through the window, witnessed the accused seated on the deceased's abdomen, strangling her with one hand while holding a knife in the other. Despite repeated pleas to release the deceased and her young son, the accused refused and proceeded to stab the deceased in the neck and abdomen. He became increasingly violent, damaged household items, dragged the deceased to the doorway, and stabbed himself twice. 8.Police officers, who had been alerted by neighbours, arrived at the scene and, with the assistance of members of the public, forced entry into the house and rescued the child. They found the deceased unresponsive. The accused, who had sustained self-inflicted injuries, was taken to Kenyatta National Hospital, while the deceased was taken to Tumaini Medical Centre, where she was pronounced dead. The incident was recorded at Kabete Police Station vide OB No. 17/19/10/2023. 9.Investigations followed. Scene of Crime officers photographed the scene, and a blood-stained knife was recovered and forwarded to the Government Chemist for forensic analysis. Although DNA extracted from the deceased's blood did not yield a profile, analysis of samples recovered from the knife established the presence of blood from an unknown male. The accused voluntarily provided DNA samples for comparison. A post-mortem examination conducted on 24th October 2023 concluded that the deceased died from excessive haemorrhage resulting from multiple stab wounds. The accused was later certified fit to plead following a mental assessment. 10.Upon reading the facts to the accused and after confirming that the plea-bargaining process was voluntary, that the accused's constitutional rights had not been violated during the negotiation process, and further that he was not coerced, the court accepted the plea agreement and convicted the accused accordingly. 11.In mitigation, Ms Makokha and Mr. Korir, learned counsels who acted for the accused, urged the Court to exercise leniency in sentencing. Counsels submitted that the accused is genuinely remorseful and deeply regrets the events of the material day that led to the death of the deceased. Ms. Makokha referred to 1 John 2:1, emphasising the importance of repentance and forgiveness. 12.Counsels informed the Court that the accused is a first offender and the father of two minor children, aged nine and four years. The older child is being cared for by the accused's elderly mother, who is diabetic and struggling to provide for the child, while the younger child resides with her mother. It was further submitted that the accused was raised solely by his mother after his father deserted the family over fifteen years ago. 13.Counsel stated that before his arrest, the accused earned a living as a water bowser operator. Mr. Korir attributed the tragic incident to excessive alcohol consumption by both the accused and the deceased, submitting that intoxication impaired the accused's judgment. Since his incarceration, the accused has undergone spiritual, emotional and moral reform through regular church attendance and continues to express profound remorse. Mr. Korir urged the Court to consider these mitigating factors and impose a lenient sentence. 14.In response, Ms Timoi, learned prosecution counsel, urged the Court to impose a custodial sentence. Counsel submitted that the accused had subjected the deceased to a pattern of gender-based violence during their cohabitation, culminating in the fatal attack. She emphasised that the accused repeatedly stabbed the deceased in the neck in the presence of her five-year-old child, causing her death. 15.Counsel further submitted that, after the attack, the accused refused to release the child, became violent by damaging household property, and moved the deceased's body while the child remained at the scene. It was argued that these circumstances aggravated the offence and had left the child severely traumatised, having witnessed the killing of his mother. Counsel therefore urged the Court to impose a deterrent custodial sentence. 16.The deceased's mother delivered a victim impact statement in which she expressed profound grief over the loss of her daughter. She stated that the deceased was her youngest child and had been a source of support to her. She lamented that the deceased left behind a young son who continues to miss his mother. She told the Court that the loss was irreversible and had caused her immense pain, and prayed that justice be done for her grandson and the deceased. 17.The court also called for a probation report which has been duly considered. 18.Having considered the plea agreement, the circumstances surrounding the offence, the probation report, and the impact on the victim’s family and the community, it is clear that this was a grave and senseless act of violence. The accused, while showing some remorse through his plea, acted with extreme aggression, causing the death. His actions were not only criminal but deeply traumatising to the victim’s family. 19.The penal section for the offence of manslaughter is contained in section 205 of the Penal Code, which provides: -Any person who commits the felony of manslaughter is liable to imprisonment for life. 20.The Court of Appeal in Thomas Mwambu Wenyi v Republic (2017) eKLR cited the decision of the Supreme Court of India in Alistar Anthony Pereira v State of Mahareshtra at paragraphs 70-71, where the court held as follows on sentencing:“Sentencing is an important task in the matter of crime. One of the prime objectives of the criminal law is imposition of appropriate adequate, just and proportionate sentence commensurate with the nature and gravity of crime and the manner in which the crime is done. There is no straight jacket formula for sentencing an accused person on proof of crime. the courts have evolved certain principles: twin objective of sentencing policy is deterrence and correction. What sentence would meet the ends of justice depends on the facts and circumstance of each case and the court must keep in mind the gravity of the crime, motive for the crime nature of the offence and all other attendance circumstances. The principle of proportionality in sentencing a crime doer is well entrenched in criminal jurisprudence, As a matter of law, proportion between crime and punishment bears most relevant influence in determination of sentencing the offender. The court has to take into consideration all aspects including Social interest and consciousness of the society for award of appropriate sentence" 21.The evidence on record demonstrates that the accused violently attacked the deceased, with whom he was cohabiting, by strangling her and repeatedly stabbing her in the neck and abdomen. The assault occurred in the presence of the deceased's five-year-old son, who witnessed the attack. The injuries inflicted caused excessive haemorrhage, leading to the deceased's death. 22.I have considered the mitigating factors advanced on behalf of the accused. He accepted responsibility by entering into a plea agreement and pleading guilty to the lesser charge of manslaughter. He is a first offender, expressed genuine remorse, and prayed for leniency. I have also taken into account his personal circumstances, including that he is the father of two minor children and that, prior to his arrest, he was gainfully employed. I further note counsel's submission that both the accused and the deceased were intoxicated on the material night, and that the accused has since undertaken spiritual and personal reform while in custody. 23.While the accused's remorse and guilty plea are relevant mitigating factors, they cannot diminish the gravity of the offence or restore the life that was lost. The plea has, however, spared the deceased's family the ordeal of a full trial and demonstrates a measure of acceptance of responsibility. 24.The aggravating circumstances are substantial. The deceased had previously reported an assault by the accused, demonstrating a history of domestic violence within the relationship. The fatal attack was prolonged and brutal, committed in the presence of a vulnerable child who has been left traumatised and without his mother. The accused further prevented neighbours from intervening and refused to release the child until the police forced entry. The deceased's mother described the profound emotional and practical impact of her daughter's death and the hardship now faced by her grandson. 25.The Court must balance the mitigating factors against the aggravating circumstances. While rehabilitation remains an important objective of sentencing, the sentence must also reflect the sanctity of human life, denounce gender-based violence and domestic violence, hold the accused accountable, deter similar offending, and meet the legitimate expectations of the victim's family and the wider public. 26.Having weighed all the relevant circumstances, including the plea bargain, the mitigation, the victim impact statement and the aggravating features of the offence, I am satisfied that a substantial custodial sentence is warranted. Accordingly, I sentence the accused to twenty (20) years' imprisonment. Pursuant to section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, the sentence shall run from 24th October 2023, being the date of his arrest.Orders accordingly. JUDGEMENT DATED AND DELIVERED THIS 29TH DAY OF JUNE 2026D. KAVEDZAJUDGEIn the presence of:Ms. Maina for the StateMr. Korir for the AccusedKarimi Court Assistant.