Being an appeal against the sentence only of 2 years imprisonment for the offense of giving false information to a person employed in the public service contrary to section 129(a) of the Penal Code judgement delivered by SA Opande on 8th July 2025.
The appellant filed a petition of appeal dated 18th July 2025. He also filed written submissions dated 12th January 2026.
In the petition he indicated that:
1. He is the sole breadwinner of his family hence his continued stay in prison will ruin the lives of his family.
2. He is remorseful and begs for forgiveness
3. He sought a non-custodial sentence.
4. He promised to remain a law abiding citizen and an ambassador ensuring that other citizens will abide by the law.
5. That the 2 years sentence imposed on him is harsh.
The respondent filed written submissions dated 17th April 2026 wherein they argued that the sentence was legal and within the law. They add the court to dismiss the appeal and uphold the sentence.
An appellate court can only interfere with an order of sentence imposed by a sentence in court in limited circumstances. These are set out in the case of Wanjema versus Republic 1971 EA 494 where the court held:
“An appellate court should not interfere with the discretion which a trial court has exercised as to sentence unless it is evident that it overlooked some material factor, took into account some immaterial factor, acted on a wrong principle or the sentence is manifestly excessive in the circumstances of the case.”
The appellant has not claimed that the sentence is unlawful. He merely pleaded for a relook at the sentence and repeated his mitigation.
The appellant was a first offender and generally an imprisonment will not be imposed when a first offender except where the offense is grave, aggravated or widespread.
The court observed that the act of the accused were tied to a more serious act of a failed robbery. He never appreciated the trauma the victim suffered but instead took advantage by making the police track false signals as a result of which they lost track of going after the main criminals. This court is unable to disagree with observations made by the trial court.
For this reason the appeal is dismissed.
READ IN OPEN COURT THIS 8TH SEPTEMBER 2026 IN THE PRESENCE OF:
THE ACCUSED
BEFORE HON JOYCE GANDANI, HIGH COURT JUDGE
MACHUMA, PROSECUTOR
DIANA COURT ASSISTANT
The appellant filed a petition of appeal dated 18th July 2025. He also filed written submissions dated 12th January 2026.
In the petition he indicated that:
1. He is the sole breadwinner of his family hence his continued stay in prison will ruin the lives of his family.
2. He is remorseful and begs for forgiveness
3. He sought a non-custodial sentence.
4. He promised to remain a law abiding citizen and an ambassador ensuring that other citizens will abide by the law.
5. That the 2 years sentence imposed on him is harsh.
The respondent filed written submissions dated 17th April 2026 wherein they argued that the sentence was legal and within the law. They add the court to dismiss the appeal and uphold the sentence.
An appellate court can only interfere with an order of sentence imposed by a sentence in court in limited circumstances. These are set out in the case of Wanjema versus Republic 1971 EA 494 where the court held:
“An appellate court should not interfere with the discretion which a trial court has exercised as to sentence unless it is evident that it overlooked some material factor, took into account some immaterial factor, acted on a wrong principle or the sentence is manifestly excessive in the circumstances of the case.”
The appellant has not claimed that the sentence is unlawful. He merely pleaded for a relook at the sentence and repeated his mitigation.
The appellant was a first offender and generally an imprisonment will not be imposed when a first offender except where the offense is grave, aggravated or widespread.
The court observed that the act of the accused were tied to a more serious act of a failed robbery. He never appreciated the trauma the victim suffered but instead took advantage by making the police track false signals as a result of which they lost track of going after the main criminals. This court is unable to disagree with observations made by the trial court.
For this reason the appeal is dismissed.
READ IN OPEN COURT THIS 8TH SEPTEMBER 2026 IN THE PRESENCE OF:
THE ACCUSED
BEFORE HON JOYCE GANDANI, HIGH COURT JUDGE
MACHUMA, PROSECUTOR
DIANA COURT ASSISTANT