1. The Applicant’s Notice of Motion dated 01st April 2026 seeks sentence review on account of mitigation, rehabilitation and time served.
2. The record shows that this Court, in HCCRMISCAPPL E021 of 2026, delivered a ruling on 28th April 2026 dismissing a similar application by the same Applicant for sentence review on the ground of want of jurisdiction.
3. Further, the Applicant’s conviction and sentence were affirmed by the Court of Appeal in Benard Okemwa Nyakundi v Republic [2026] KECA 187 (KLR), thereby bringing the appellate process to a final conclusion.
4. In the circumstances, this Court is functus officio and cannot reopen or vary the sentence, nor can it sit on appeal over the decision of the Court of Appeal.
5. The present application raises substantially the same issues and seeks identical relief as that determined in the ruling of 28th April 2026. It is therefore res judicata and an abuse of the court process.
6. The filing of successive applications before the same Court on the same subject matter, after a definitive determination, amounts to a clear abuse of the court process. Litigation must come to an end.
7. The Applicant is hereby cautioned that the Judiciary operates as an integrated system, and any further similar applications will be detected and may be summarily rejected with appropriate sanctions.
8. Accordingly, the application dated 01st April 2026 is hereby dismissed.
2. The record shows that this Court, in HCCRMISCAPPL E021 of 2026, delivered a ruling on 28th April 2026 dismissing a similar application by the same Applicant for sentence review on the ground of want of jurisdiction.
3. Further, the Applicant’s conviction and sentence were affirmed by the Court of Appeal in Benard Okemwa Nyakundi v Republic [2026] KECA 187 (KLR), thereby bringing the appellate process to a final conclusion.
4. In the circumstances, this Court is functus officio and cannot reopen or vary the sentence, nor can it sit on appeal over the decision of the Court of Appeal.
5. The present application raises substantially the same issues and seeks identical relief as that determined in the ruling of 28th April 2026. It is therefore res judicata and an abuse of the court process.
6. The filing of successive applications before the same Court on the same subject matter, after a definitive determination, amounts to a clear abuse of the court process. Litigation must come to an end.
7. The Applicant is hereby cautioned that the Judiciary operates as an integrated system, and any further similar applications will be detected and may be summarily rejected with appropriate sanctions.
8. Accordingly, the application dated 01st April 2026 is hereby dismissed.