The applicant’s application is dated the 1st August 2024. The applicant is seeking the review of his sentence from life imprisonment to a definite prison term.
The court has noted that previously the applicant had been sentenced to serve 26 years but when he went on appeal the Court of Appeal the court in its wisdom substituted the sentence with a life imprisonment term as per the law. The High Court is now being urged to review a decision of the court of Appeal which is an invitation to exercise a jurisdiction which this court does not have.
It should be emphasized here that the hierarchy of courts is a very important consideration in the exercise of Revisionary or appellate jurisdiction. The court finds guidance in the case owners of Motor Vessel Lilians’ Ltd Vs Caltex (K) Ltd Vs. Caltex Oil (K) Ltd (1989) Eklrin which Nyarangi, JA expressed himself thus:
“Jurisdiction is everything. Without it a court must down its tools”.
The High Court cannot exercise Revisionary jurisdiction under Articles 22, 23, 165 (3)(e) of the Constitution and Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code over decisions of the court of Appeal. In deed the High Court cannot even purport to exercise Revisionary jurisdiction over the decision of a judge of concurrent jurisdiction.
To attempt to do so, would be tantamount to overthrowing the constitution in its structure and form regarding hierachial order of the criminal justice system. The applicant herein cannot therefore be helped by this court. He tried his luck with the court of Appeal but the law was not on his side.
The sentence imposed by the court of Appeal is the correct sentence following the recent Supreme Court decision on mandatory minimum sentences in Sexual Offences See R Vs. Joshua Mwangi Gichuki Petition E. 018/2023. The application by the applicant is therefore a non-starter and is hereby dismissed. The applicant shall continue serving the sentence as pronounced by the court of Appeal.
It is so ordered.