https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/6944
Republic v Wabwire alias Baba Daisy Were & another (Criminal Case E017 of 2024) [2026] KEHC 6944 (KLR) (15 May 2026) (Sentence) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 6944 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the High Court at Busia Criminal Case E017 of 2024 SM Mohochi, J May 15, 2026 Between Republic Prosecution and Mathew Wabwire...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2026] KEHC 6944 (KLR)
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case E017 of 2024
- Judges
- ["SM Mohochi"]
- 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.
No structured case brief is available yet for this judgment.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Republic v Wabwire alias Baba Daisy Were & another (Criminal Case E017 of 2024) [2026] KEHC 6944 (KLR) (15 May 2026) (Sentence) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 6944 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the High Court at Busia Criminal Case E017 of 2024 SM Mohochi, J May 15, 2026 Between Republic Prosecution and Mathew Wabwire alias Baba Daisy Were 1st Accused Joseph Adungo Paade 2nd Accused Sentence 1.The accused was charged with the offence of murder contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code;It is alleged that he killed Jackline Naliaka, hereafter the deceased, on 26th November 2024, at Khuluanda Village, Kapina Sub-Location, Nambale Sub-County, Busia, he denied the charges, and a trial was conducted. The prosecution presented 10 witnesses and the court found the charge was proved beyond reasonable doubt and accordingly convicted him for the offence; 2.The deceased was hit by a blunt object (metal rod) on the head with the deceased taking flight into a nearby maize plantation. 3.In mitigation counsel for the convicts indicated remorsefulness for events giving rise to this case. That from the pre-sentence report the convict is a young family man, sole breadwinner of his family. 4.That the Pre-sentence report indicates the convict is 46 years old a father of three children while the deceased was of advanced age leaving behind eight adult children the report leaves it to the courts discretion on sentence. 5.The driver of this offence was a longstanding land dispute. Analysis 6.It is the duty of this court to impose a sentence that meets the facts and circumstances of the case; this court has considered the full circumstances of the offence which is contained in the Facts; 7.The applicable law on sentence for the offence of Murder is found under the provisions of Section 24 of the Penal Code which reads as follows;“Any person who is convicted of murder shall be sentenced to death". 8.The section provides for the maximum sentence, that is death; this court has taken into consideration the aggravating circumstances in that he used a deadly weapon namely iron rod in committing the offence; the deceased was and elderly lady incapable of a physical fight but the convict elected to visit upon her extreme violence in an ambush fashion inflicting the fatal injuries; 9.The mitigating factors taken into consideration by this court are that the convict is a 1st time offenders with no previous criminal record, he is family man with young children and has also expressed remorse; 10.The Court has considered the mitigating circumstances as well as the aggravating circumstances and is persuaded that while the court shall not impose the maximum sentence an imprisonment as a deterrent sentence is appropriate under the circumstances 11.This Court accordingly imposes an imprisonment Sentence on both convicts of twenty-five (25) years to run from the 19th December 2024. 12.The convict shall be entitled to the prison remission should he be of good conduct while serving the sentence. 13.The convicts have a right to Appeal within 14 daysIt is so Ordered. DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT BUSIA ON THIS DAY OF 15TH DAY OF MAY, 2026MOHOCHI S.M.PRESIDING JUDGE