BACKGROUND
1. This ruling concerns the sentence to be imposed upon the accused following his conviction on his own plea of guilty to the offence of manslaughter. The conviction arose after the original charge of murder was reduced pursuant to a plea agreement entered into between the State and the Defence.
2. The particulars of the offence were that on 26th October 2025 at about 7.15 a.m. at Vyemani Area, Likoni Sub-County, within Mombasa County, the accused unlawfully caused the death of ANN NKATHA.
3. The accused initially pleaded not guilty to the charge of murder. Subsequently, he entered into a plea agreement with the prosecution whereby the charge was reduced to manslaughter. The Court accepted the plea agreement and convicted the accused on his own plea of guilty.
4. Pursuant to the directions of the Court, a Victim Impact Statement and a Pre-Sentence Inquiry Report (PSR) were prepared and filed by the Probation Department.
5. Learned Counsel Ms. Kuria mitigated on behalf of the accused. Counsel submitted that the accused accepted responsibility for his actions through the plea bargaining process and that the unfortunate death arose in the context of a domestic dispute. Counsel further submitted that the accused attempted to take his own life after the incident, demonstrating emotional instability and impaired judgment at the material time. It was emphasized that the accused is only 24 years old, possesses the capacity for reform and rehabilitation, and is remorseful for his actions. Counsel therefore urged the Court to consider a non-custodial sentence coupled with probation supervision, counselling and anger-management programmes. In the alternative, counsel prayed for a lenient custodial sentence that would afford the accused an opportunity for eventual reintegration into society and reunification with his daughter.
6. Learned Prosecution Counsel Ms. Cherop relied on the Victim Impact Statement and the Pre-Sentence Report dated 11th May 2026. Counsel submitted that the deceased was the wife of the accused and the mother of their only child, who is presently five years old. She narrated the events leading to the offence, noting that the accused locked the house and repeatedly stabbed the deceased while neighbours helplessly watched from outside and the child witnessed the horrifying events from inside the house. Counsel emphasized the severe psychological trauma suffered by the minor child and the immeasurable grief endured by the deceased's family. The Court was reminded that the deceased was only twenty years old when her life was violently and prematurely cut short. Counsel further drew attention to the disturbing rise in cases of femicide and domestic killings in the country and urged the Court to impose a sentence commensurate with the gravity of the offence and capable of deterring like-minded offenders.
LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND AUTHORITIES
7. Sentencing is primarily a judicial function. The Sentencing Policy Guidelines provide guidance but do not fetter judicial discretion. The Court must fashion a sentence that is proportionate to both the offender and the offence. See Francis Karioko Muruatetu & Another v Republic [2017] KESC 2 (KLR).
8. The objectives of sentencing include retribution, deterrence, rehabilitation, community protection, denunciation and restorative justice. See Dismas Wafula Kilwake v Republic [2019] KECA 5 (KLR).
FINDINGS OF FACT
9. The Court accepts the factual narrative contained in the Pre-Sentence Report and Victim Impact Statement insofar as it is consistent with the plea particulars and the material before the Court.
10. The Pre-Sentence Report indicates that the accused did not complete secondary education, possesses no vocational or technical training and had experienced recurring conflicts and periods of separation from the deceased. Notably, the deceased had resumed cohabitation with the accused approximately three weeks before the commission of the offence. During interviews with the probation officer, the accused attributed their disagreements to allegations of infidelity by the deceased. Although he now expresses remorse, the probation officer recommended a custodial sentence followed by probationary aftercare supervision.
11. The Victim Impact Statement paints a picture of profound grief, loss and enduring emotional devastation suffered by the deceased's family. It details the brutality of the attack and the continuing trauma experienced by the deceased's young child who witnessed the killing of her mother. The family expressed concern regarding the child's welfare and urged the Court to impose a sentence that would adequately reflect the gravity of the offence.
AGGRAVATING AND MITIGATING FACTORS
12. In Michael Kathewa Laichena & Another v Republic [2018] KEHC 5488 (KLR), the Court emphasized the importance of balancing aggravating and mitigating factors during sentencing.
13. The Court has considered the mitigating factors advanced on behalf of the accused, namely his youthful age, his plea of guilty which saved judicial time and spared witnesses the ordeal of a trial, and his expression of remorse.
14. The aggravating circumstances are numerous and exceptionally weighty:
a) The deceased was the accused's spouse and therefore a person entitled to trust, protection and safety from him.
b) The attack was deliberate, sustained and vicious.
c) The deceased suffered multiple stab wounds, demonstrating a level of violence far beyond what was necessary to cause death and revealing a determined intention to inflict maximum harm.
d) The offence was committed in the presence of the couple's five-year-old child who witnessed the attack upon her mother.
e) Neighbours witnessed the horrifying events and were rendered helpless as the violence unfolded before them.
f) The offence has left lasting emotional, psychological and social scars upon the deceased's family and particularly upon the minor child.
g) The offence occurred against the backdrop of a disturbing increase in cases of femicide and domestic killings in Kenya, a trend that courts must unequivocally condemn.
15. The Court has taken into account the accused's plea of guilty and the plea agreement entered into with the prosecution. Plea bargaining is an important component of the criminal justice system as it promotes efficiency, conserves judicial resources, spares witnesses and victims' families the ordeal of a lengthy trial and may demonstrate acceptance of responsibility. However, plea agreements are not intended to provide a convenient avenue through which offenders evade accountability for grave crimes. The reduction of a charge through a plea agreement does not diminish the sanctity of the life lost nor the Court's duty to impose a sentence that reflects the seriousness of the offending conduct. Sentencing must remain proportionate to the gravity of the offence, the circumstances in which it was committed and the harm caused.
16. The Court further notes that allegations of infidelity, marital discord, separation or relationship breakdown can never justify violence. Kenyan law provides lawful and civilized mechanisms for resolving domestic disputes, including counselling, mediation, separation and divorce. A spouse who is dissatisfied with a relationship has the option of walking away from it. No person acquires ownership over the life of another merely by reason of marriage or cohabitation. When relationships break down, the law permits parties to part ways; it does not permit one party to extinguish the life of the other. The accused had lawful alternatives available to him but chose violence instead.
17. The aggravating circumstances overwhelmingly outweigh the mitigating factors. The Court cannot overlook the fact that a five-year-old child witnessed the brutal killing of her mother by her father. Such an experience is likely to leave lifelong psychological consequences. Equally disturbing is the fact that neighbours watched the attack unfold, underscoring the shocking and public nature of the violence. The deceased's family must now bear the permanent loss of a daughter, while the child will grow up without maternal care and with difficult questions concerning the circumstances of her mother's death.
APPLICATION OF PRINCIPLES AND PROPORTIONALITY
18. Sentencing serves multiple objectives including punishment, deterrence, rehabilitation, denunciation, protection of the public and promotion of respect for the rule of law. The Court has carefully balanced these objectives against the circumstances of this case.
19. The Court is particularly mindful of the disturbing increase in cases of femicide, domestic homicide and family-based violence being witnessed across the country. Such offences strike at the very foundation of the family unit and undermine the constitutional values of human dignity, equality and the right to life. Courts must therefore send a clear, firm and unmistakable message that domestic disagreements, jealousy, suspected infidelity or relationship conflicts are never excuses for violence. The sentence imposed must communicate society's condemnation of such conduct and deter others who may be tempted to resolve domestic disputes through brutality.
20. The circumstances of this case call for a sentence that serves not only the purpose of punishment but also general deterrence. The deceased was subjected to a sustained and violent attack resulting in multiple injuries. The offence unfolded in the presence of a five-year-old child and before neighbours who watched in horror as events transpired. The Court cannot ignore the lifelong psychological scars likely to be borne by the child nor the devastating loss suffered by the deceased's family. A strong sentence is therefore necessary to convey that those who choose violence over lawful separation, dialogue or other legal remedies will be held fully accountable before the law.
DECISION ON SENTENCE
21. Having considered all the circumstances of this case, the Court finds that the extreme brutality of the attack, the multiplicity of injuries inflicted upon the deceased, the fact that the offence was committed in the presence of a young child and before helpless neighbours, the devastating impact upon the victim's family, and the pressing need for deterrence and denunciation leave no room for a non-custodial sentence.
22. The Court is satisfied that only a severe custodial sentence can adequately reflect the sanctity of human life, denounce the conduct of the accused, provide justice to the victim and her family, protect the surviving child and serve as a deterrent to the accused and to other persons who may contemplate similar acts of domestic violence.
23. Consequently, having weighed all the mitigating and aggravating factors, applied the Sentencing Policy Guidelines and considered the authorities cited, this Court sentences the accused to LIFE IMPRISONMENT.
24. The sentence shall take effect from 19th November 2025, being the date when the accused was first arraigned before this Court.
APPEAL RIGHTS — EXPLANATION AND RECORD
25. The accused was informed, in Kiswahili through an interpreter, of his right to appeal against both conviction and sentence to the Court of Appeal, of the procedure and timelines for lodging an appeal, and of his right to apply for legal aid and extension of time where necessary. The explanation was made in open court and is duly recorded.
It is so ordered.
DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED AT MOMBASA THIS 4TH DAY OF JUNE 2026.
Ruling delivered through Microsoft Teams Online Platform.
WENDY KAGENDO MICHENI
JUDGE
Attendance
Ms Kuria- Counsel for the Accused
Mr Sirima -State Counsel
Ms. Bebora – Court Assistant
1. This ruling concerns the sentence to be imposed upon the accused following his conviction on his own plea of guilty to the offence of manslaughter. The conviction arose after the original charge of murder was reduced pursuant to a plea agreement entered into between the State and the Defence.
2. The particulars of the offence were that on 26th October 2025 at about 7.15 a.m. at Vyemani Area, Likoni Sub-County, within Mombasa County, the accused unlawfully caused the death of ANN NKATHA.
3. The accused initially pleaded not guilty to the charge of murder. Subsequently, he entered into a plea agreement with the prosecution whereby the charge was reduced to manslaughter. The Court accepted the plea agreement and convicted the accused on his own plea of guilty.
4. Pursuant to the directions of the Court, a Victim Impact Statement and a Pre-Sentence Inquiry Report (PSR) were prepared and filed by the Probation Department.
5. Learned Counsel Ms. Kuria mitigated on behalf of the accused. Counsel submitted that the accused accepted responsibility for his actions through the plea bargaining process and that the unfortunate death arose in the context of a domestic dispute. Counsel further submitted that the accused attempted to take his own life after the incident, demonstrating emotional instability and impaired judgment at the material time. It was emphasized that the accused is only 24 years old, possesses the capacity for reform and rehabilitation, and is remorseful for his actions. Counsel therefore urged the Court to consider a non-custodial sentence coupled with probation supervision, counselling and anger-management programmes. In the alternative, counsel prayed for a lenient custodial sentence that would afford the accused an opportunity for eventual reintegration into society and reunification with his daughter.
6. Learned Prosecution Counsel Ms. Cherop relied on the Victim Impact Statement and the Pre-Sentence Report dated 11th May 2026. Counsel submitted that the deceased was the wife of the accused and the mother of their only child, who is presently five years old. She narrated the events leading to the offence, noting that the accused locked the house and repeatedly stabbed the deceased while neighbours helplessly watched from outside and the child witnessed the horrifying events from inside the house. Counsel emphasized the severe psychological trauma suffered by the minor child and the immeasurable grief endured by the deceased's family. The Court was reminded that the deceased was only twenty years old when her life was violently and prematurely cut short. Counsel further drew attention to the disturbing rise in cases of femicide and domestic killings in the country and urged the Court to impose a sentence commensurate with the gravity of the offence and capable of deterring like-minded offenders.
LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND AUTHORITIES
7. Sentencing is primarily a judicial function. The Sentencing Policy Guidelines provide guidance but do not fetter judicial discretion. The Court must fashion a sentence that is proportionate to both the offender and the offence. See Francis Karioko Muruatetu & Another v Republic [2017] KESC 2 (KLR).
8. The objectives of sentencing include retribution, deterrence, rehabilitation, community protection, denunciation and restorative justice. See Dismas Wafula Kilwake v Republic [2019] KECA 5 (KLR).
FINDINGS OF FACT
9. The Court accepts the factual narrative contained in the Pre-Sentence Report and Victim Impact Statement insofar as it is consistent with the plea particulars and the material before the Court.
10. The Pre-Sentence Report indicates that the accused did not complete secondary education, possesses no vocational or technical training and had experienced recurring conflicts and periods of separation from the deceased. Notably, the deceased had resumed cohabitation with the accused approximately three weeks before the commission of the offence. During interviews with the probation officer, the accused attributed their disagreements to allegations of infidelity by the deceased. Although he now expresses remorse, the probation officer recommended a custodial sentence followed by probationary aftercare supervision.
11. The Victim Impact Statement paints a picture of profound grief, loss and enduring emotional devastation suffered by the deceased's family. It details the brutality of the attack and the continuing trauma experienced by the deceased's young child who witnessed the killing of her mother. The family expressed concern regarding the child's welfare and urged the Court to impose a sentence that would adequately reflect the gravity of the offence.
AGGRAVATING AND MITIGATING FACTORS
12. In Michael Kathewa Laichena & Another v Republic [2018] KEHC 5488 (KLR), the Court emphasized the importance of balancing aggravating and mitigating factors during sentencing.
13. The Court has considered the mitigating factors advanced on behalf of the accused, namely his youthful age, his plea of guilty which saved judicial time and spared witnesses the ordeal of a trial, and his expression of remorse.
14. The aggravating circumstances are numerous and exceptionally weighty:
a) The deceased was the accused's spouse and therefore a person entitled to trust, protection and safety from him.
b) The attack was deliberate, sustained and vicious.
c) The deceased suffered multiple stab wounds, demonstrating a level of violence far beyond what was necessary to cause death and revealing a determined intention to inflict maximum harm.
d) The offence was committed in the presence of the couple's five-year-old child who witnessed the attack upon her mother.
e) Neighbours witnessed the horrifying events and were rendered helpless as the violence unfolded before them.
f) The offence has left lasting emotional, psychological and social scars upon the deceased's family and particularly upon the minor child.
g) The offence occurred against the backdrop of a disturbing increase in cases of femicide and domestic killings in Kenya, a trend that courts must unequivocally condemn.
15. The Court has taken into account the accused's plea of guilty and the plea agreement entered into with the prosecution. Plea bargaining is an important component of the criminal justice system as it promotes efficiency, conserves judicial resources, spares witnesses and victims' families the ordeal of a lengthy trial and may demonstrate acceptance of responsibility. However, plea agreements are not intended to provide a convenient avenue through which offenders evade accountability for grave crimes. The reduction of a charge through a plea agreement does not diminish the sanctity of the life lost nor the Court's duty to impose a sentence that reflects the seriousness of the offending conduct. Sentencing must remain proportionate to the gravity of the offence, the circumstances in which it was committed and the harm caused.
16. The Court further notes that allegations of infidelity, marital discord, separation or relationship breakdown can never justify violence. Kenyan law provides lawful and civilized mechanisms for resolving domestic disputes, including counselling, mediation, separation and divorce. A spouse who is dissatisfied with a relationship has the option of walking away from it. No person acquires ownership over the life of another merely by reason of marriage or cohabitation. When relationships break down, the law permits parties to part ways; it does not permit one party to extinguish the life of the other. The accused had lawful alternatives available to him but chose violence instead.
17. The aggravating circumstances overwhelmingly outweigh the mitigating factors. The Court cannot overlook the fact that a five-year-old child witnessed the brutal killing of her mother by her father. Such an experience is likely to leave lifelong psychological consequences. Equally disturbing is the fact that neighbours watched the attack unfold, underscoring the shocking and public nature of the violence. The deceased's family must now bear the permanent loss of a daughter, while the child will grow up without maternal care and with difficult questions concerning the circumstances of her mother's death.
APPLICATION OF PRINCIPLES AND PROPORTIONALITY
18. Sentencing serves multiple objectives including punishment, deterrence, rehabilitation, denunciation, protection of the public and promotion of respect for the rule of law. The Court has carefully balanced these objectives against the circumstances of this case.
19. The Court is particularly mindful of the disturbing increase in cases of femicide, domestic homicide and family-based violence being witnessed across the country. Such offences strike at the very foundation of the family unit and undermine the constitutional values of human dignity, equality and the right to life. Courts must therefore send a clear, firm and unmistakable message that domestic disagreements, jealousy, suspected infidelity or relationship conflicts are never excuses for violence. The sentence imposed must communicate society's condemnation of such conduct and deter others who may be tempted to resolve domestic disputes through brutality.
20. The circumstances of this case call for a sentence that serves not only the purpose of punishment but also general deterrence. The deceased was subjected to a sustained and violent attack resulting in multiple injuries. The offence unfolded in the presence of a five-year-old child and before neighbours who watched in horror as events transpired. The Court cannot ignore the lifelong psychological scars likely to be borne by the child nor the devastating loss suffered by the deceased's family. A strong sentence is therefore necessary to convey that those who choose violence over lawful separation, dialogue or other legal remedies will be held fully accountable before the law.
DECISION ON SENTENCE
21. Having considered all the circumstances of this case, the Court finds that the extreme brutality of the attack, the multiplicity of injuries inflicted upon the deceased, the fact that the offence was committed in the presence of a young child and before helpless neighbours, the devastating impact upon the victim's family, and the pressing need for deterrence and denunciation leave no room for a non-custodial sentence.
22. The Court is satisfied that only a severe custodial sentence can adequately reflect the sanctity of human life, denounce the conduct of the accused, provide justice to the victim and her family, protect the surviving child and serve as a deterrent to the accused and to other persons who may contemplate similar acts of domestic violence.
23. Consequently, having weighed all the mitigating and aggravating factors, applied the Sentencing Policy Guidelines and considered the authorities cited, this Court sentences the accused to LIFE IMPRISONMENT.
24. The sentence shall take effect from 19th November 2025, being the date when the accused was first arraigned before this Court.
APPEAL RIGHTS — EXPLANATION AND RECORD
25. The accused was informed, in Kiswahili through an interpreter, of his right to appeal against both conviction and sentence to the Court of Appeal, of the procedure and timelines for lodging an appeal, and of his right to apply for legal aid and extension of time where necessary. The explanation was made in open court and is duly recorded.
It is so ordered.
DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED AT MOMBASA THIS 4TH DAY OF JUNE 2026.
Ruling delivered through Microsoft Teams Online Platform.
WENDY KAGENDO MICHENI
JUDGE
Attendance
Ms Kuria- Counsel for the Accused
Mr Sirima -State Counsel
Ms. Bebora – Court Assistant