[2011] KEHC 1920 (KLR)
The court found that the fine of Kshs.300,000/- imposed on each applicant for carrying an excess load was unlawful because it exceeded the statutory maximum of Kshs.200,000/- for first offenders as set out in Rule 41(2) of Legal Notice No. 118 of 2008. There was no evidence that the applicants were repeat offenders,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2011] KEHC 1920 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Shreeji Enterprises Ltd; Applicant: Japheth Mbai Kaviti; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Mombasa
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision 23 of 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Revision of Sentence
- Outcome
- application for revision allowed; sentence revised
- Judges
- JV Juma
- Legal Topics
- Traffic Offences, Sentencing, Statutory Penalties
- 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
Shreeji Enterprises Ltd
Applicant
Japheth Mbai Kaviti
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Application for Revision of Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the fine imposed by the trial court exceeded the statutory maximum for the offence of carrying excess load under the Traffic Act.
- 2 Whether the applicants were first offenders and entitled to the statutory penalty for first offences.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the fine of Kshs.300,000/- imposed on each applicant for carrying an excess load was unlawful because it exceeded the statutory maximum of Kshs.200,000/- for first offenders as set out in Rule 41(2) of Legal Notice No. 118 of 2008. There was no evidence that the applicants were repeat offenders, and the prosecution did not indicate otherwise. The trial court therefore acted ultra vires in imposing a higher fine. The excess amount of Kshs.100,000/- per applicant must be refunded as the sentence was not in accordance with the law.
Court Disposition
application for revision allowed; sentence revised
Orders
- The fine imposed on each applicant is reduced to Kshs.200,000/-.
- The excess amount of Kshs.100,000/- paid by each applicant is to be refunded immediately.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
18 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT MOMBASA
CRIMINAL REVISION NO. 23 OF 2011
(Arising from Traffic Case No. 4391 of 2011 & 4392 of 2011 of the Chief Magistrate’s Court at Mombasa: T. Ole Tanchu – S.R.M.)
1. SHREEJI ENTERPRISES LTD
2. JAPHETH MBAI KAVITI...............................................................................APPLICANTS
=VERSUS=
REPUBLIC..............................................................................................................RESPONDENT
RULING
By their letter dated 30th May 2011 MESSRS A.B. PATEL & PATEL ADVOCATES have sought a review of the sentence imposed by the learned Senior Resident Magistrate sitting at Mombasa Law Courts in TRAFFIC CASE NO. 4391/2011 REPUBLIC –VS- JAPHETH MBAI KAVITI and TRAFFIC CASE NO. 4392 of 2011 REPUBLIC –VS- SHREEJI ENTERPRISES LTD. In the said traffic cases the accused persons faced a charge of ‘using a motor vehicle on a road with a load greater than the load specified contrary to S. 56(1) as read with S. 58(1) and Rule 41(2) of the Legal Notice No. 118 dated 12th September 2008 of the Traffic Act Cap 403 Laws of Kenya’. The accused both entered a plea of guilty to the charge and each was fined Kshs.300,000/- in default one (1) year imprisonment. It is alleged that the fine imposed was far in excess of the maximum allowed for that offence. In each traffic case the particulars alleged that the accuseds were carrying a load of 100,400 kgs instead of the allowed load of 48,000 kgs thereby each had an excess load of 52,400 kgs.
S. 56(1) of the Traffic Act provides:
“S 6(1) No vehicle shall be used on a road with a load greater than the load specified by the manufacturer of the chassis of the vehicle or than the load capacity determined by an inspector under this Act”
The penalty for a violation of S. 56(1) is provided by Rule 42 of LN No. 118 of 2008. Rule 41(2) sets out a scale indicating fines payable. For an excess weight of over 10,000 kgs the allowable fine upon a first conviction is Kshs.200,000/-. In both cases the prosecutor gave no indication that the accuseds were repeat offenders. They were therefore to be treated as 1st offenders. The fine of Kshs.300,000/- was therefore clearly ultra vires the law and was an unlawful fine. The accuseds ought not to have been fined an amount greater than that prescribed by the law. I therefore direct that the amount of Kshs.100,000/- be immediately refunded to each of the two accused persons.
It is so ordered.
Dated and Delivered in Mombasa this 15th day of July 2011.
M. ODERO
JUDGE