The Applicant, Lucas Were Oruma filed an undated notice of motion application which was supported by the Affidavit of the Applicant (Lukas Were Oruma) sworn on 24/2/2026, in which he applies for the for the review of the sentence meted on him by the Trial Court in his submissions dated 5/5/2026. The applicant raised one central issue for determination; that he is entitled to his sentence by reviewed and computed from the date of arrest under the provision of section 333 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, which the trial court did not take into account.
He thus urges the court to order that the sentence should run from 10/12/2024, the date of his arrest.
I have carefully examined the trial court record.
The applicant was charged with the offence of stealing contrary to Section 268(1) as read with Section 275 of the Penal Code . Particulars are that:-
“ on the 12 day of December, 2024 at Hotspot Bar Thika Sub- County within Kiambu County, stole a mobile phone make iPhone Promax 512gb valued at Kshs. 95,000/- the property of JEREMIAH Mburu Njenga.”
The Applicant was presented for plea on 16/12/2024. The charge sheet indicates he was arrested on 13/12/2024. He pleaded not guilty.
He was granted bond but the court record does not show he raised the cash of Kshs. 50,000/- that was granted to him or the subsequent cash bail of Kshs. 30,000/- following the variation by the court on 14/2/2025.
The Applicant changed plea on 21/5/2025 and convicted on the same day but was sentenced on 18/6/2025.
In sentencing the Applicant on 18/6/2025, the court (D. Milimu – SRM) pronounced the sentence follows:-
“The Pre-sentence report is not favourable to the accused person. The same is dated 18 th June, 2025. Then accused is a repeat offender having been sentenced to two years imprisonment over a similar offence. The view of this family and the victims view have also been put into consideration coupled with the circumstances surrounding the occurrence of the offence. The Accused is hereby sentenced to serve three (3) years imprisonment without the alternative of fine. Right of Appeal 14 days.”
The prosecutor, M/s Koech has conceded that the trial court did not factor in the period the Applicant was in custody prior to the sentence.
The pronouncement of the sentence by the trial court duly confirms that the proviso to section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure code was not taken into account in passing the sentence.
The Application by the Applicant for review of sentence to take into account the period spent in custody prior to being sentenced is thus merited.
I thus allow the application and direct that the sentence of three (3) years imprisonment by the trial court be varied to start running from the date of his arrest that is on 13/12/2024 and not the date he was sentenced on 18/6/2025.
The sentence of imprisonment of 3 years is accordingly varied and reduced by six (6) months and six (6) days.
It is so ordered.
Dated, signed and delivered virtually at Thika this 15 th day of June, 2026.
...............................................
L. N. MUGAMBI
JUDGE
HCCR REV E008/2026 2 | Page
He thus urges the court to order that the sentence should run from 10/12/2024, the date of his arrest.
I have carefully examined the trial court record.
The applicant was charged with the offence of stealing contrary to Section 268(1) as read with Section 275 of the Penal Code . Particulars are that:-
“ on the 12 day of December, 2024 at Hotspot Bar Thika Sub- County within Kiambu County, stole a mobile phone make iPhone Promax 512gb valued at Kshs. 95,000/- the property of JEREMIAH Mburu Njenga.”
The Applicant was presented for plea on 16/12/2024. The charge sheet indicates he was arrested on 13/12/2024. He pleaded not guilty.
He was granted bond but the court record does not show he raised the cash of Kshs. 50,000/- that was granted to him or the subsequent cash bail of Kshs. 30,000/- following the variation by the court on 14/2/2025.
The Applicant changed plea on 21/5/2025 and convicted on the same day but was sentenced on 18/6/2025.
In sentencing the Applicant on 18/6/2025, the court (D. Milimu – SRM) pronounced the sentence follows:-
“The Pre-sentence report is not favourable to the accused person. The same is dated 18 th June, 2025. Then accused is a repeat offender having been sentenced to two years imprisonment over a similar offence. The view of this family and the victims view have also been put into consideration coupled with the circumstances surrounding the occurrence of the offence. The Accused is hereby sentenced to serve three (3) years imprisonment without the alternative of fine. Right of Appeal 14 days.”
The prosecutor, M/s Koech has conceded that the trial court did not factor in the period the Applicant was in custody prior to the sentence.
The pronouncement of the sentence by the trial court duly confirms that the proviso to section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure code was not taken into account in passing the sentence.
The Application by the Applicant for review of sentence to take into account the period spent in custody prior to being sentenced is thus merited.
I thus allow the application and direct that the sentence of three (3) years imprisonment by the trial court be varied to start running from the date of his arrest that is on 13/12/2024 and not the date he was sentenced on 18/6/2025.
The sentence of imprisonment of 3 years is accordingly varied and reduced by six (6) months and six (6) days.
It is so ordered.
Dated, signed and delivered virtually at Thika this 15 th day of June, 2026.
...............................................
L. N. MUGAMBI
JUDGE
HCCR REV E008/2026 2 | Page