1. The Applicant seeks revision of the sentence imposed by the trial court following his conviction for the offence of grievous harm contrary to section 234 of the Penal Code. The charge alleged that on 16th March 2024, at Moiitunya Sub-location, Manga Sub-County within Nyamira County, jointly with another not before the court, he unlawfully assaulted Justus Orwoba Nyongau with a sharp object, thereby occasioning him grievous harm. Upon conviction, the Applicant was sentenced to pay a fine of KES 150,000, in default to serve five (5) years' imprisonment.
2. I have examined the lower court record, including the charge sheet, the proceedings, the judgment, the sentence and the P3 Form dated 18th March 2024 which shows that the complainant sustained a lacerated frontal scalp wound, swelling of the chest, swelling of the forearm and hand, and a fracture of the right tibia and fibula accompanied by swelling and tenderness. The examining medical officer assessed the degree of injury as grievous harm.
3. Section 234 of the Penal Code provides:
"Any person who unlawfully does grievous harm to another is guilty of a felony and is liable to imprisonment for life."
4. The injuries documented in the P3 Form were extensive and serious. The complainant suffered a fractured right tibia and fibula in addition to multiple soft tissue injuries inflicted with a sharp object. The medical assessment of grievous harm was therefore fully supported by the nature of the injuries.
5. Although the offence attracts a maximum sentence of life imprisonment, the trial court imposed a fine of KES. 150,000, with a default sentence of five (5) years' imprisonment. Considering the gravity of the injuries sustained by the complainant, the sentence cannot be said to be unlawful, harsh or excessive. Indeed, the trial court exercised considerable leniency by imposing the option of a fine instead of an immediate custodial sentence.
6. Upon examining the record as required under sections 362 and 364 of the Criminal Procedure Code, I find no illegality, incorrectness or impropriety in the sentence that would justify this Court's intervention in revision.
7. The application for revision of sentence is without merit and is hereby dismissed. The conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court are upheld.
2. I have examined the lower court record, including the charge sheet, the proceedings, the judgment, the sentence and the P3 Form dated 18th March 2024 which shows that the complainant sustained a lacerated frontal scalp wound, swelling of the chest, swelling of the forearm and hand, and a fracture of the right tibia and fibula accompanied by swelling and tenderness. The examining medical officer assessed the degree of injury as grievous harm.
3. Section 234 of the Penal Code provides:
"Any person who unlawfully does grievous harm to another is guilty of a felony and is liable to imprisonment for life."
4. The injuries documented in the P3 Form were extensive and serious. The complainant suffered a fractured right tibia and fibula in addition to multiple soft tissue injuries inflicted with a sharp object. The medical assessment of grievous harm was therefore fully supported by the nature of the injuries.
5. Although the offence attracts a maximum sentence of life imprisonment, the trial court imposed a fine of KES. 150,000, with a default sentence of five (5) years' imprisonment. Considering the gravity of the injuries sustained by the complainant, the sentence cannot be said to be unlawful, harsh or excessive. Indeed, the trial court exercised considerable leniency by imposing the option of a fine instead of an immediate custodial sentence.
6. Upon examining the record as required under sections 362 and 364 of the Criminal Procedure Code, I find no illegality, incorrectness or impropriety in the sentence that would justify this Court's intervention in revision.
7. The application for revision of sentence is without merit and is hereby dismissed. The conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court are upheld.