'1. The offender herein was initially charged with murder contrary to Section 203 as read with 204 of the penal code. He later entered into a plea bargain agreement with prosecution and the charges were reduced to manslaughter contrary to Section 202 as read with 205 of the penal code. He pleaded guilty to manslaughter and he was accordingly convicted.
2. This case is now coming up for sentencing. The court called for a pre-sentence report from the probation and after Care department and it has emerged from the same that the offender is a brother to the deceased.
4. Defence Counsel submitted that the offender is a young man aged 19 from a humble background , he is remorseful, and was a first offender. it was submitted that the offender entered into a plea bargain agreement due to his remorse and so he prays for a non- custodial sentence, Prosecution also supported the contention that he is a first offender .
5. The Supreme Court in the Muruatetu case set down the following factors to be considered in sentencing in murder trials;
a) Age of the offender.
b) Being a first offender.
c) Whether the offender pleaded guilty.
d) Character and record of the offender.
e) Commission of the offence in response to gender-based violence.
f) Remorsefulness of the offender.
g) The possibility of reform and social re-adaptation of the offender.
h) Any other factor that the court considers relevant.
5. I have considered the age of the offender nature of the offence, its circumstances, the pre-sentence report, mitigation, the remand period of about 6months , the fact that he is remorseful and the sentiments of the family of deceased , the community and local administration. The offender is a brother to deceased and it has emerged that deceased allegedly stole some items from the house of the offender and when he asked deceased about it deceased hit him with a metal bar on the shoulders . The offender also picked the same and hit deceased with it on the chest and he sustained the fatal injuries . This was indeed a case of provocation and self defence as rightly submitted by defence.
6.. I agree with defence counsel that the offender deserves leniency for entering into a plea bargain agreement and saved the precious judicial time of the court and expedited the determination of the case.
7. The probation report indicated that the family of the offender has forgiven him for the offence and community has no issue with him. I the find that a custodial sentence is not appropriate in circumstances of this case. I am inclined to impose a non -custodial sentence.
8. I proceed to sentence the offender to serve 3 years probation.
9. 14 days Right of appeal.
T.A ODERA
JUDGE
24.11.25
Delivered Virtually Via Teams Platform in the Presence of:
The offender
Koima for the State
Court Assistant: Kipchirchir
Mr. Kirianki advocate for the Offender
'
2. This case is now coming up for sentencing. The court called for a pre-sentence report from the probation and after Care department and it has emerged from the same that the offender is a brother to the deceased.
4. Defence Counsel submitted that the offender is a young man aged 19 from a humble background , he is remorseful, and was a first offender. it was submitted that the offender entered into a plea bargain agreement due to his remorse and so he prays for a non- custodial sentence, Prosecution also supported the contention that he is a first offender .
5. The Supreme Court in the Muruatetu case set down the following factors to be considered in sentencing in murder trials;
a) Age of the offender.
b) Being a first offender.
c) Whether the offender pleaded guilty.
d) Character and record of the offender.
e) Commission of the offence in response to gender-based violence.
f) Remorsefulness of the offender.
g) The possibility of reform and social re-adaptation of the offender.
h) Any other factor that the court considers relevant.
5. I have considered the age of the offender nature of the offence, its circumstances, the pre-sentence report, mitigation, the remand period of about 6months , the fact that he is remorseful and the sentiments of the family of deceased , the community and local administration. The offender is a brother to deceased and it has emerged that deceased allegedly stole some items from the house of the offender and when he asked deceased about it deceased hit him with a metal bar on the shoulders . The offender also picked the same and hit deceased with it on the chest and he sustained the fatal injuries . This was indeed a case of provocation and self defence as rightly submitted by defence.
6.. I agree with defence counsel that the offender deserves leniency for entering into a plea bargain agreement and saved the precious judicial time of the court and expedited the determination of the case.
7. The probation report indicated that the family of the offender has forgiven him for the offence and community has no issue with him. I the find that a custodial sentence is not appropriate in circumstances of this case. I am inclined to impose a non -custodial sentence.
8. I proceed to sentence the offender to serve 3 years probation.
9. 14 days Right of appeal.
T.A ODERA
JUDGE
24.11.25
Delivered Virtually Via Teams Platform in the Presence of:
The offender
Koima for the State
Court Assistant: Kipchirchir
Mr. Kirianki advocate for the Offender
'