[2025] KEHC 9475 (KLR)

[2025] KEHC 9475 (KLR)

The High Court lacks jurisdiction to review or resentence in a matter where a court of concurrent jurisdiction (the Kiambu High Court) has already upheld the conviction and sentence. Article 50(2)(q) of the Constitution allows a convicted person to either appeal or seek review by a higher court, but not both. The Supreme Court's Muruatetu decisions only declared the mandatory nature of the death sentence unconstitutional, not the death penalty itself for capital offences such as robbery with violence. Since the applicant's appeal was already dismissed by the High Court, this application for review is misconceived, improperly before the court, and constitutes an abuse of process.

Citation
[2025] KEHC 9475 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Isaack Njau Wanjiru Alias Iso; Respondent: Republic
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Thika
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
3 July 2025
Case Number
Miscellaneous Criminal Application E091 of 2024
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Application for Review of Sentence
Outcome
application struck out
Judges
FN Muchemi
Legal Topics
Review of Sentence, Mandatory Death Penalty, Jurisdiction of High Court, Abuse of Process
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Review of Sentence Mandatory Death Penalty Jurisdiction of High Court Abuse of Process

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Isaack Njau Wanjiru Alias Iso

Applicant

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Criminal Application / Ruling on Application for Review of Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to review a sentence already upheld by a court of concurrent jurisdiction.
  2. 2 Whether the mandatory death sentence for robbery with violence is unconstitutional following the Supreme Court's Muruatetu decisions.
  3. 3 Whether the application constitutes an abuse of court process.

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court lacks jurisdiction to review or resentence in a matter where a court of concurrent jurisdiction (the Kiambu High Court) has already upheld the conviction and sentence. Article 50(2)(q) of the Constitution allows a convicted person to either appeal or seek review by a higher court, but not both. The Supreme Court's Muruatetu decisions only declared the mandatory nature of the death sentence unconstitutional, not the death penalty itself for capital offences such as robbery with violence. Since the applicant's appeal was already dismissed by the High Court, this application for review is misconceived, improperly before the court, and constitutes an abuse of process.

Court Disposition

application struck out

Orders

  • The application dated 21st November 2024 is struck out.
  • No orders as to costs.