[2021] KEHC 8574 (KLR)
The court found that, following the Supreme Court's decision in Muruatetu, the mandatory death sentence for robbery with violence is unconstitutional. The court considered the seriousness of the offence, the value of property stolen, the violence inflicted on the complainant, and the petitioners' mitigation,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEHC 8574 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Salim Mwachungu Malu; Applicant: Elvis M. Kipelenge; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Mombasa
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Petition 161 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Resentencing Application / Judgment
- Outcome
- life sentence set aside; petitioners resentenced to 14 years imprisonment from date of arrest
- Judges
- DO Ogembo
- Legal Topics
- Resentencing, Robbery With Violence, Mandatory Sentencing, Constitutional Rights, Proportionality of 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
Salim Mwachungu Malu
Applicant
Elvis M. Kipelenge
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Resentencing Application / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the mandatory death sentence for robbery with violence is unconstitutional following the Supreme Court decision in Muruatetu.
- 2 What is the appropriate sentence for the petitioners given the circumstances of the offence and their mitigation.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that, following the Supreme Court's decision in Muruatetu, the mandatory death sentence for robbery with violence is unconstitutional. The court considered the seriousness of the offence, the value of property stolen, the violence inflicted on the complainant, and the petitioners' mitigation, including their remorse, reformation, and time spent in custody. Applying the principle of proportionality and adequate punishment, the court determined that a sentence of fourteen years' imprisonment from the date of arrest was appropriate and set aside the life sentence previously imposed.
Court Disposition
life sentence set aside; petitioners resentenced to 14 years imprisonment from date of arrest
Orders
- The life sentence imposed on the petitioners is set aside.
- The petitioners are sentenced to fourteen (14) years imprisonment from the date of their arrest.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
26 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT MOMBASA
PETITION NO. 161 OF 2019
SALIM MWACHUNGU MALU
ELVIS M. KIPELENGO...................................................................................PETITIONERS
VERSUS
REPUBLIC........................................................................................................RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT ON RESENTENCING
1. The Petitioners herein SALIM MWACHUNGU MALU and ELVIS M. KIPELENGO were jointly charged with the Offence of robbery with violence contrary to 296 (2) of the Penal Code.
2. The particulars of the offence were that on the 20th day of June, 2009 at around 9:00 p.m at Makuyuni area Taita Taveta County they robbed SILVANO JULIUS of a motorcycle registration number KMCE 217 A make Tvs valued at Kshs. 85,000/=, mobile phone make “Lonke” valued at Kshs. 7,000/= and cash 1,500= all valued at Kshs. 93,000/= and immediately after the time of such robbery wounded the Silvano Julius.” In the alternative they were charged with handling stolen goods contrary to section 322 (2) of the Penal Code. They were convicted and sentenced to death.
3. Their Appeal to the High Court was dismissed and sentence upheld. The death sentence was later commuted to life sentence in 2016.
4. The Petitioners are now in this court pursuant to the Supreme court decision in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & Another vs. Republic (2017) eKLRin which the apex court found the mandatory nature of the death sentence to be unconstitutional.
5. When the matter came for resentencing, Ms. Wanjohi, learned counsel appeared for the Prosecution but did not file any submissions. The Petitioners filed their submissions separately, on 2/12/2020.
6. The 1st Petitioner (SALIM MWACHUNGU MALU) on his part submitted that he has reformed; that he regretted the offence and promised not to repeat the crime or any other crime in his lifetime. He is a first offender and submitted that if released, he will lead society in campaign against crime.
7. The 2nd Petitioner (ELVIS MASINDE KIPELENGE) on his part submitted that he has reformed; that he regretted the offence and promised not to repeat the crime or any other crime in his lifetime. He pledges to be a good example in the society by sharing with the society the rough experience he has undergone in custody. He has never been charged with any prison misconduct. He prays this court to consider the years he has spent in prison since his arrest and impose an appropriate sentence.
8. I have considered the petition and the submissions. The Petitioners committed robbery with violence and stole property worth Kshs. 93,000/=. In the process they beat the complainant until he lost consciousness. The complainant ended up in hospital. In my view, the offence committed by the Petitioners requires adequate punishment. In R vs. Scott (2005) NSWCCA 152Howie, GroveandBarr JJ stated:
“There is a fundamental and immutable principle of sentencing that the sentence imposed must ultimately reflect the objective seriousness of the offence committed and there must be a reasonable proportionality between the sentence passed in the circumstances of the crime committed…One of the purposes of punishment is to ensure that an offender is adequately punished…a further purpose of punishment is to denounce the conduct of the offender.”
9. In my considered view, the Petitioners would be adequately punished by a jail term of fourteen (14) years. The Petitioners were tried while in remand. I therefore hereby set aside the life sentence and in place therefore jail the Petitioners for a period of fourteen (14) years from the date of their arrest.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT MOMBASA THIS 4TH DAY OF MARCH, 2021.
E. K. OGOLA
JUDGE
Judgment delivered via MS Teams in the presence of:
Petitioner in person
Ms. Wanjohi for the DPP
Ms. Peris Court Assistant