[2015] KEHC 5286 (KLR)
The court held that the grounds advanced by the applicant, namely the alleged excessive fines and personal circumstances, were matters considered during mitigation and are not proper grounds for revision. The court emphasized that under Section 364(5) of the Criminal Procedure Code, a revision cannot be sought where...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] KEHC 5286 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Shahto Yasaf; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision 55 of 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- AW Macharia
- Legal Topics
- Criminal Revision, Sentencing, Excessive Fines
- 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
Shahto Yasaf
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the High Court can entertain a criminal revision where an appeal lies.
- 2 Whether the alleged excessive fines and personal circumstances of the applicant are proper grounds for revision.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the grounds advanced by the applicant, namely the alleged excessive fines and personal circumstances, were matters considered during mitigation and are not proper grounds for revision. The court emphasized that under Section 364(5) of the Criminal Procedure Code, a revision cannot be sought where an appeal lies. Since the applicant's complaints pertain to the sentence and mitigation, which are appealable matters, the application for revision was declined and dismissed.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application dated 15th April, 2015 is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
13 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CRIMINAL REVISION NO.55 OF 2015
SHAHTO YASAF……………………….…………....…………….APPELLANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC …………………………..…………………………..RESPONDENT
RULING
I have perused the lower court record. Plea was taken on 12th March, 2015. The same was unequivocal. This revision is sought on account that the fines imposed were excessive. Under Section 364(5) of the Criminal Procedure code, a revision shall not be sought where an appeal lies.
The matters being raised herein that the applicant’s parents were killed in war were considered in the mitigation.They are not matters that may be considered in a revision. Moreso, that issue that the sentence was excessive is a matter for consideration in an appeal.
In the foregoing, I decline the revision sought and dismiss the application dated 15th April, 2015.
DATED and DELIVERED in NAIROBI this 14th day of April, 2015.
G. W. NGENYE – MACHARIA
JUDGE