https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/8036

State v Tios (Criminal Case E001 of 2026) [2026] KEHC 8036 (KLR) (10 June 2026) (Sentence) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 8036 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the High Court at Kapenguria Criminal Case E001 of 2026 RPV Wendoh, J June 10, 2026 Between State Prosecutor and Clement Tios Accused Sentence 1.Clement Tios was charged with the offence of Murder contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code. 2.After a plea bargain, the charge was reduced to one of Manslaughter contrary to Section 202 as read with Section 205 of the Penal Code. The particulars of the charge were that on 30/12/2025 at Tilak Village, Tilak Sub-Location, Kapkoris Location in West Pokot Sub-County, within West Pokot County unlawfully killed Danson Krop. 3.The accused pleaded guilty to the said charge and was convicted. The matter is now before this court for sentence. 4.Sentencing is essentially an exercise of the court’s discretion guided by the Supreme Law of the land being the Constitution, other relevant laws on sentencing and the 2016 Judiciary of Kenya Sentencing Policy Guidelines, Despite the importance of the said guidelines, Sentencing remains an exercise of Judicial discretion as was aptly expressed by the Supreme Court in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & Another -V- Republic Petition 1/2015, “(72) We wish to make it very clear that these guidelines in no way replace judicial discretion. They are advisory and not mandatory. They are geared to promoting consistency and transparency in sentencing hearings. They are also aimed at promoting public understanding of the sentencing process”. 5.Page 15 Paragraph 4.1 of the Judiciary Sentencing Policy Guidelines provides for what the court should consider in sentencing as follows;i.Retribution: to punish the offender for his/her criminal conduct in a just manner;ii.Deterrence; to deter the offender from committing a similar offence subsequently as well as to discourage other people from committing similar offences;iii.Rehabilitation; to enable the offender reform from his/her criminal disposition and become a law-abiding person;iv.Restorative justice; to address the needs arising from the criminal conduct such as loss and damages;v.Community Protection; to police the community by incapacitating the offender.vi.Denunciation; to communicate the community’s condemnation of the criminal conduct.vii.Reconciliation; to mend the relationship between the offender the victim and the communityviii.Reintegration; To facilitate the re-entry of the offender into the society. 6.The Supreme Court in Muruatetus case, also added to the mitigating factors to be considered when sentencing as follows;-1.Age of the offender;2.Being a first offender;3.Whether the offender pleaded guilty;4.Character and record of the offender;5.Commission of the offence in response to gender-based violence;6.Remorsefulness of the offender;7.The possibility of reform and social re-adaptation of the offender;8.Any other factor that the court considers relevant. 7.This Court asked the Probation Officer to make enquires and file a presentence report which this court will also consider.The accused was said to be a first offender. He pleaded guilty to the charge and therefore did not waste the court’s time. 9.Mr. Ndinyo Counsel for the Accused in mitigation, told the court that the accused is remorseful; that he committed the offence because of the dispute between deceased and the parents; that he never intended to kill his brother and prayed for a lenient sentence. 10.The court has taken into account all that mitigation and noted the contents of the presentence report; That the Accused and deceased, though the only sons of their father, had long-standing disagreements, and both abused alcohol and drugs. I also take note of the fact that the accused’s father is not willing to have him home yet because of his past aggressive nature, disobedience and failure to heed advice from parents. In my view, the Accused needs rehabilitation, Counselling and to be kept away from his family as the emotions are still high. A deterrence sentence is also called for.I will therefore sentence the Accused to twelve years (12) years imprisonment.The sentence will commence on 26/1/2026 when he was arraigned in court. SENTENCE DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED IN OPEN COURT AT KAPENGURIA THIS 10TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026.R. WENDOHJUDGEIn the Presence of:-Prosecution Counsel – Ms. Koech.Accused – presentMr. Changorok for accused.Hellen- Court Assistants