[2025] KEHC 8648 (KLR)
The court held that the applicant was sentenced to 30 years imprisonment for defilement, an offence which statutorily attracts a mandatory sentence of life imprisonment under section 8(1) and 8(2) of the Sexual Offences Act. Recent Supreme Court decisions have affirmed the constitutionality and lawfulness of...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEHC 8648 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: John Kanja Wanjiku; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kerugoya
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application E027 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Application for Re Sentencing
- Outcome
- application for re-sentencing declined
- Judges
- EM Muriithi
- Legal Topics
- Defilement, Sentencing Principles, Mandatory Sentences, Sexual Offences Act, Resentencing Applications
- 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
John Kanja Wanjiku
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Application for Re Sentencing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to re-sentencing for the offence of defilement under section 8(1) and 8(2) of the Sexual Offences Act.
- 2 Whether the sentence of 30 years imprisonment should be reduced in light of recent Supreme Court decisions on mandatory minimum sentences.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the applicant was sentenced to 30 years imprisonment for defilement, an offence which statutorily attracts a mandatory sentence of life imprisonment under section 8(1) and 8(2) of the Sexual Offences Act. Recent Supreme Court decisions have affirmed the constitutionality and lawfulness of mandatory minimum sentences for sexual offences, including life imprisonment. The applicant's sentence already reflects consideration of pre-trial detention as required by law. The High Court lacks jurisdiction to increase the sentence to life imprisonment as the Supreme Court did in a similar case, and therefore, the applicant's request for re-sentencing is declined. The applicant is...
Court Disposition
application for re-sentencing declined
Orders
- The applicant’s application for re-sentencing is declined.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
Wanjiku v Republic (Miscellaneous Criminal Application E027 of 2023) [2025] KEHC 8648 (KLR) (19 June 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 8648 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Kerugoya
Miscellaneous Criminal Application E027 of 2023
EM Muriithi, J
June 19, 2025
Between
John Kanja Wanjiku
Applicant
and
Republic
Respondent
Ruling
1. The applicant seeks re-sentencing for reduction of his sentence of his imprisonment for 30 years for the offence of detention contrary to section 8(1) and read with 8(2) of the Sexual Offences. The applicant has been in custody since 9. 7.2019 and his appeal to the High Court was dismissed on 25. 4.2023. The court, however, directed that his sentence of imprisonment for 30 years should commence on 7. 12. 2018 when he was arrested to take into account the seven (7) months of the pre-trial detention.
2. The sentence prescribed for the offence of defilement under section 8(1) and 8(2) is imprisonment for life.
3. The Supreme Court of Kenya has in recent decisions of Republic v Manyeso [2025] KESC 16 (KLR) and Republic v Ayako (Petition E002 of 2024) [2025] KESC 20 (KLR) (11 April 2025) (Judgment), has settled the imprisonment for life is constitutional and lawful sentence, the Court holding that “the life imprisonment sentence remains lawful and in line with Section 8 of the Sexual Offences Act” and that the minimum and mandatory sentences in sexual offences are also constitutionally lawful,
4. The mandatory sentence for offence of defilement under section 8(1) and (2) of the sexual offences Act is life imprisonment.
5. The applicant was lucky he was sentenced for 30 years imprisonment on the state of the law as it then existed before the clarification of the Supreme Court of Kenya. In addition his sentence has taken into account the period of pre-trial detention in accordance with Section 333(2) of Criminal Procedure Code.
6. This Court does not have the power in the circumstances of this to reinstate the sentence of life imprisonment for the offence subject of this application as the Supreme Court did in Republic v Ayako (Petition E002 of 2024) [2025] KESC 20 (KLR) (11 April 2025) (Judgment).
7. Consequently, the applicant must count himself lucky that he is serving a determinate sentence of thirty (30) years for an offence which calls for a mandatory sentence of life imprisonment.
Orders 8. Accordingly, for the reason given above applicant’s application for re-sentencing in this matter is declined.Order accordingly.
DATED AND DELIVERED ON THIS 19TH DAY OF JUNE 2025. EDWARD M. MURIITHIJUDGEAppearances:Mr. Mamba for the DPP.Applicant – Present.