Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Kenya decisions
Decisions matching the current search
High Court revision on a cheating sentence: conviction was upheld, the fine-and-default imprisonment structure was found lawful, and custody credit of two days was ordered.
Republic v Ngeno & another (Criminal Case 23 of 2018) [2026] KEHC 11522 (KLR) (28 July 2026) (Sentence)
Having considered the mandatory sentencing framework, the Sentencing Policy Guidelines, the pre-sentence reports, mitigation, and the victim’s family views, the court concluded that the gravity of the double murder required a deterrent custodial sentence. It imposed 20 years’ imprisonment on each count and directed that the sentences run consecutively, commencing from the date of sentence because the Accused were on bond.
Source excerpt
Mahusumbuka v Republic (Criminal Revision E110 of 2026) [2026] KEHC 10665 (KLR) (16 July 2026) (Ruling)
The High Court declined to revise the sentence because the applicant failed to show any legal basis for interference: the sentence was lawful, within statutory limits, proportionate to the offences, and the trial court had not acted on a wrong principle or ignored a material factor.
Source excerpt
Chief Registrar of the Judiciary v Makau & 9 others (Criminal Revision E021 of 2026) [2026] KEHC 7989 (KLR) (5 June 2026) (Ruling)
The subordinate court committed an apparent error by imposing an omnibus sentence without specifying punishment for each count, and the High Court, exercising revisionary jurisdiction, corrected the sentence because the original fine was excessive for first-time offenders who pleaded guilty to offences carrying relatively limited maximum custodial terms.
Source excerpt
Chweya v Republic (Miscellaneous Application E003 of 2026) [2026] KEHC 13280 (KLR) (21 May 2026) (Ruling)
The High Court at Nyamira allowed an unopposed application to make two prison terms run concurrently and backdated the sentence to the date of arrest.
Kamau v Republic (Criminal Appeal E041 of 2023) [2026] KEHC 6994 (KLR) (20 May 2026) (Judgment)
The appeal was incompetent because it was filed out of time without leave and, in any event, no appeal lay against the conviction as it was entered on an unequivocal plea of guilty. The request to merge or cojoin sentences from other distinct cases had no legal basis in this appeal. The court therefore found no valid appeal and dismissed it.
Source excerpt
Gikunju v Republic (Criminal Revision E059 of 2026) [2026] KEHC 6805 (KLR) (19 May 2026) (Ruling)
The application failed because the High Court had already determined the applicant’s appeal and was therefore functus officio; any further challenge to sentence lay before the Court of Appeal, not by way of revision before the same court.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal upheld seven-year consecutive sentences for defilement of two minors, holding the terms were lawful, not excessive, and properly ordered consecutively.
Explore more
