[2019] KEHC 3808 (KLR)
The High Court, having already determined the applicant's appeal against conviction and sentence, is functus officio and lacks jurisdiction to entertain a subsequent application for revision of the same sentence. The law prohibits a court from exercising both appellate and revisional jurisdiction over the same...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEHC 3808 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Vitalis Okoth Omondi; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Siaya
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision 53 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- RE Aburili
- Legal Topics
- Arson, Criminal Revision, Jurisdiction of High Court
- 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
Vitalis Okoth Omondi
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to entertain a revision application after having determined an appeal on the same matter.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court, having already determined the applicant's appeal against conviction and sentence, is functus officio and lacks jurisdiction to entertain a subsequent application for revision of the same sentence. The law prohibits a court from exercising both appellate and revisional jurisdiction over the same matter, and to do so would amount to sitting on appeal over its own decision. Accordingly, the application for revision is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application for revision is dismissed.
- File closed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
16 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT SIAYA
SIAYA CRIMINAL REVISION NO. 53 OF 2019
VITALIS OKOTH OMONDI ..................APPLICANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC........................................... RESPONDENT
(Being an application for revision of sentence in Ukwala SRMC No. 565 of 2016 dated 23. 4.2018. ).
RULING
1. The Applicant/Convict was convicted of the offence of arson. He appealed which appeal was dismissed.
2. He now applies for revision of the same sentence which was upheld on appeal.
3. This Court lacks the jurisdiction to hear and determine both appeal and revision.
4. Accordingly, the application for revision is dismissed.
5. File closed.
DATED AT SIAYA THIS 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2019.
HON. LADY JUSTICE R.E. ABURILI
JUDGE