https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/12880

**REPUBLIC OF KENYA** **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI** **CRIMINAL DIVISION - MILIMANI** **CRIMINAL CASE NO E037 OF 2020** **REPUBLIC** ......................................... **PROSECUTOR** **VERSUS** **JAMES GICHIMU WACHIRA** ............................. **ACCUSED** **JUDGMENT** **PLEA-BARGAIN AGREEMENT** **INFORMATION** 1. The Accused Person herein James Gichimu Wachira alias Mwalimu, is charged with the offence of Manslaughter; Contrary to Section 202 as read with Section 205 of the Penal Code Cap.63 Laws of Kenya. 2. Particulars of the offence being that on the 28th October, 2020 at 2230 Hrs at Soweto near Catholic Church area, in Njiru Sub County, within Nairobi County, unlawfully killed Geoffrey Kipsang. 3. The Plea Bargain Agreement was executed on 30/4/2025 by: 1. Ms Gikui Gichuhi ODPP – Head of Homicide 2. Ms. R. Tum for ODPP – Prosecution Counsel 3. Mr. Andrew Loketo Kariu – Advocate for the Accused person 4. James Gichimu Wachira – Accused Person **COURT PROCEEDINGS – 20/4/2026** 4. Gladys Court Assistant read over the Charge and explained to the Accused Person in Kiswahili charge of manslaughter contrary to Section 203 & 204 Penal Code. **Accused person – 'Ni-kweli' – It is true.** 5. **The Court** recorded; Plea of guilty is entered for the Accused person on his own plea of guilty. 6. **Ms Tum for ODPP** states – I have included Paragraph 2 of the Plea Bargain Agreement that the Accused person was induced/coerced and he signed the Agreement. 7. **Accused person** states – I agree on my own free will. **FACTS IN KISWAHILI** Ms Tum, ODPP read the facts in Kiswahili. 8. On 28/10/20 at about 19.00 Hrs the Accused person and deceased went for a drinking spree with other friends Peter Mwangi and Benson Kioko and all went to a drinking Den kwa Wachipo – Soweto area and stayed out until 22.00 Hrs when the establishment was closed. 9. After closure they remained in the Changaa Den after closure and they slept there as they did not have any residence. 10. The deceased started to make noise and they all told the deceased to keep quiet as it was during the Covid 19 Pandemic and the Police Officers would come by. 11. The Accused person strangled the deceased and threatened him and later left him, and the Accused person asked the other friends to remove the deceased from the Changaa Den and placed him on the road near the Catholic Church nearby, and they left him there and they went back into the Changaa Den and slept. 12. The Proprietor of the Changaa Den found the Accused and 2 others inside the Den and found the deceased on the side of the road and he was bleeding from the mouth. The Police Officers and members of the Public came to the scene and they took him away to the City Mortuary and the Post Mortem indicated the deceased died from Pneumonia and head injury from a blunt object. 13. The Accused person was arrested on 1/11/2020 and was arrested as the Accused person was drinking in another drinking Den and he was charged with murder. *Post Mortem Report – Exhibit I* 14. Accused person stated; The Facts are True. **The Court**: The Court entered plea of guilty on the Accused person's plea of guilty after Particulars of offence and Facts are read out to him. **Ms. Tum for ODPP** – No previous records against the Accused person. **Mr. Kariu** – No objection, we pray for Pre-sentence Report to be prepared and forwarded to court. **PRE-SENTENCE PROCEEDINGS – 30/7/2026** 15. **Mr. Bickoh, ODPP/Prosecution/State,** stated; The Accused is a 1st offender. The circumstances of the deceased's death; a confrontation arose and there was a fight with the deceased where they were sleeping instead of helping the deceased; the Accused person and friend took him outside and left them there after beating him. 16. The deceased is/was a family man, a husband with wife and 5 children. The experience of losing father and husband was traumatic to them; they are physically, psychologically, economically and health-wise in distress. He was the breadwinner. Therefore, the prayer for the family & victims is for a custodial sentence. 17. The Pre-sentence Report on attitude towards the offence: the offender pleads with the Court to grant a lenient sentence or non-custodial sentence due to his age, health and that he does not want to be a bother to family and close relatives once he is released from prison. The recommendation shows a preference for a lenient sentence other than a non-custodial sentence. **MITIGATION** 18. **Mr. Kariu for the Accused Person** stated in mitigation; he is very remorseful for causing the death of the deceased, also being a friend, and prays the Court gives a lenient sentence and rely on the Pre-sentence Report in its entirety, and will quantify certain statements in the Report. 19. The Accused wants the period considered if he gets a custodial sentence in compliance with Section 333(2) CPC and discount his incarceration, and that the Court finds that his sentencing will be lenient for the entire period of proceedings. 20. The Accused person has cooperated with the Prosecution leading to the Plea-Bargain Agreement. The circumstances leading to the death of the deceased; the deceased and Accused person were homeless and were given premises to sleep once the business of the Bar closed/after official business hours. The Accused and deceased were both intoxicated at the time; the evidence is that there was a physical confrontation. We humbly submit the deceased started the commotion. The Accused person tried to contain the situation; in the alcoholic stupor, the act occasioned his death. I pray the Court consider that in a state of drunkenness, a situation of heteronomy of the will cante arise a situation whereby a person's acts are independent of moral beliefs and the law. Both the Accused person and deceased were not cognizant of what each was doing. 21. The Accused person be given lenient sentencing after conviction. I am also minded that the Accused person wants a custodial sentence, that should not influence the Court in any way whatsoever, for the following reasons: 1. It will set a bad precedent – The Accused person who does not want to face the reality of life and continue enjoying the tax payer's money. 1. It is morally and ethically inappropriate for one to be a guest of the State, and the Court allows the same. 1. It is also a burden on Tax Payers. All Prisons do not contribute Taxes and actually burden other Tax Payers. 22. In conclusion; the Accused person is an old man, 76 years old, married with a grandchild, and justice is served if he is given a non-custodial sentence. He is sick and the burden is taken by his lawyer fully. The lawyer is fully capable of taking care of the Accused person. The offence occurred during the Covid 19 pandemic period; the deceased and Accused were housed in a bar. **SENTENCING** 23. The Court considered the evidence of Prosecution and Defence mitigation and considered the following; **Aggravating factors:** The Accused person caused serious physical injury and death of the victim. He targeted a vulnerable person, homeless like him, and there was flagrant use of violence. **Mitigating factors:** The Accused person is an elderly person aged 76 years old, he is sick as reported by Counsel and also duplicated in the Pre-sentence Report, and is remorseful as the deceased was a friend and were both homeless, housed by the owner of a Bar, and he was intoxicated. He has undertaken the Plea-Bargain Agreement so as to expedite the matter. **SENTENCE** 24. The court sentences the Accused person to serve 10 years imprisonment, to be computed with the Pre-Trial period, with effect from 13/11/2020, and remission under Section 46 of the Prisons Act. 14 days to appeal. **RULING DELIVERED,SIGNED AND DATED IN OPEN COURT** **CRIMINAL DIVISION, MILIMANI ON 29/7/2026** **VIRTUALLY/PHYSICALLY.** **M. W. MUIGAI** **JUDGE**