[2016] KEHC 884 (KLR)
The High Court found that the sentence of three years' imprisonment imposed by the trial court for the offence of child neglect was appropriate and proportionate to the seriousness of the offence. The court emphasized the aggravating circumstances: the appellant repeatedly left her disabled child locked in a house...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] KEHC 884 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Tabitha Nyaguthie; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nanyuki
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 50 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed; sentence upheld
- Judges
- MM Kasango
- Legal Topics
- Child Neglect, Sentencing Principles, Children With Disabilities, Parental Responsibility
- 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
Tabitha Nyaguthie
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence imposed for child neglect was excessive or warranted reduction.
- 2 Whether the appellant's admission and plea for mercy justified a lesser sentence.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court found that the sentence of three years' imprisonment imposed by the trial court for the offence of child neglect was appropriate and proportionate to the seriousness of the offence. The court emphasized the aggravating circumstances: the appellant repeatedly left her disabled child locked in a house without care, resulting in severe neglect and suffering. The appellant's admission of guilt and plea for mercy did not mitigate the gravity of her conduct, especially given her failure to seek help or demonstrate genuine understanding of her parental responsibilities. The court held that the welfare of the child, particularly one with special needs, required strict enforcement...
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed; sentence upheld
Orders
- The appeal against sentence is dismissed.
- The sentence of three years' imprisonment imposed by the lower court is upheld.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
31 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NANYUKI
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 50 OF 2016
TABITHA NYAGUTHIE.……………… APPELLANT
versus
REPUBLIC …………..……..……. RESPONDENT
(Being an appeal from the original conviction and sentence inNanyuki Chief Magistrate’s Court Criminal Case No. 128 of 2015
by Hon. T. MATHEKA Chief Magistrate on 4th August 2015).
JUDGMENT
1. Appellant TABITHA NYAGUTHIE was convicted before the Nanyuki Chief Magistrate’s Court with the offence of neglecting a child contrary to section 127(1)(a) of the Children’s Act. She was sentence to serve 3 years imprisonment. By this appeal she seeks that this court does reduce that sentence.
2. In her oral submissions before court she admitted that she had done wrong in neglecting her child but sought mercy. She submitted she had “changed her ways.” She stated that the court should release her because her children were suffering.
3. The learned Senior Principal Prosecution Counsel opposed the appeal because of the aggravating circumstances that led to appellant’s sentence. He submitted that she had left the child in such deplorable condition in a locked house for one week that when the door was broken down by social workers with the assistance of the police the child, who suffered from cerebral palsy, was found eating his own faeces. Counsel also submitted that appellant’s other child had been taken into a children’s home due to similar neglect by appellant.
4. The eloquent judgment of the trial magistrate well sums up the facts of the case and the responsibilities of parent which the appellant failed to exercise. She stated thus in the judgement:-
“ It is not in dispute that the accused person is the mother of (name withheld). It is also not in dispute that (name withheld) is a child with disability. He was confined by the mother in a manner that amount to ill treatment as is clear from the testimony of PW 1, PW 2 and PW 3, where the child was left to stay hungry and in his own faeces.
The accused did not do it once, but several times. Even after a good Samaritan took her youngest child leaving her with (name withheld), she still found it difficult to parent this one child.
She did not tell the court what efforts if any she made to get help or treatment for her child. The accused was quick to simply state that she would not do it again but clearly she is not fit to parent and has not internalised the seriousness of what she did.
A mother of a special child in this day and age is expected to take special care of her child. Help is available only if she seeks it as the child cannot speak for himself. The accused knowing that her child could not do anything for himself let alone locked up in the house for such long periods that he soiled himself and in some instance fed on his own faeces. How more cruel could she get. This is unacceptable and cannot be tolerated. A child with disability calls for special sacrifice by the society but especially on the part of the parent.
In my view the charge against the accused is not only proved but also admitted. I find her guilty as charged of the offence of child neglect contrary to s. 127(1) of the Children Act and convict her under s. 215 of the CPC.”
5. The sentence meted out by the trial court was in this court’s view commensurative to the offence. For that reason appeal against sentence is dismissed. The lower court’s sentence is upheld.
DATED AND DELIVERED THIS 19TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2016.
MARY KASANGO
JUDGE
CORAM:
Before Justice Mary Kasango
Court Assistant …………………………………………………………..
Appellant: Tabitha Nyaguthie ……………….……..………….
For the State: …..............................................................
COURT
Judgment delivered in open court.
MARY KASANGO
JUDGE