1. The Appellant herein was convicted for the offence of defilement contrary to Section 8(1) as read with Section 8(4) of the Sexual Offences Act No. 3 of 2006 and was sentenced to serve 15 years imprisonment. His appeal to this court was unsuccessful. He has now come back to this court with an undated application seeking for orders for:
(a) Review of the sentence and substitution of the same with a new sentence that the court may deem appropriate.
(b) In the alternative to prayer (a), an order setting aside the 15 years imprisonment and substitution of the same with a non-custodial sentence or a new sentence for the term already served or imprisonment for a term of not more than ten years.
2. The application is based on grounds stated on the face of the application and supported by the affidavit of the Applicant. The grounds thereof are that the appellant has served 5 years of the sentence imposed on him during which time he has undergone various rehabilitation programs at the incarcerating prison including attaining a Diploma in Bible studies. That he has maintained exemplary behaviour during the period of incarceration and the prison authorities are satisfied with his rehabilitation.
3. The applicant contends that this court has power under section 362 of the Criminal Procedure Code to revise its own orders where there is new evidence or significant changes warranting review of orders earlier made.
4. I have considered the application. The same is basically made under section 362 of the Criminal Procedure Code that provides as follows:
“The High Court may call and examine the record of any criminal proceedings before any subordinate court for the purpose of satisfying itself, as to the correctness, legality or propriety of any finding, sentence or order recorded or passed, and as to the regularity of any proceedings if any such subordinate court”
5. From the above provision, it is clear that the powers of this court in revision of sentences or orders passed by a subordinate court only extend to the purposes of satisfying itself to the correctness, legality or propriety of any finding, sentence or order passed by that subordinate court. The Applicant was sentenced to the minimum sentence stipulated by section 8(4) of the Sexual Offences Act. He has not shown that there was any illegality or irregularity in the sentence so as to call for a review. The application to substitute the sentence with a lesser sentence on ground that the Applicant is now reformed and rehabilitated has no basis.
6. It is also important to note that the applicant has only served a small portion of the sentence and as such he does not merit early release from prison on ground of good behaviour and rehabilitation.
7. In view of the foregoing, I do not find any merit in the application and the same is dismissed.
Delivered, dated and signed at GARSEN this 16 th day of September, 2026
Mr. Oluoch for Respondent
Applicant – present virtually at GK Prison Malindi
Court Assistant – Ms Rahma
(a) Review of the sentence and substitution of the same with a new sentence that the court may deem appropriate.
(b) In the alternative to prayer (a), an order setting aside the 15 years imprisonment and substitution of the same with a non-custodial sentence or a new sentence for the term already served or imprisonment for a term of not more than ten years.
2. The application is based on grounds stated on the face of the application and supported by the affidavit of the Applicant. The grounds thereof are that the appellant has served 5 years of the sentence imposed on him during which time he has undergone various rehabilitation programs at the incarcerating prison including attaining a Diploma in Bible studies. That he has maintained exemplary behaviour during the period of incarceration and the prison authorities are satisfied with his rehabilitation.
3. The applicant contends that this court has power under section 362 of the Criminal Procedure Code to revise its own orders where there is new evidence or significant changes warranting review of orders earlier made.
4. I have considered the application. The same is basically made under section 362 of the Criminal Procedure Code that provides as follows:
“The High Court may call and examine the record of any criminal proceedings before any subordinate court for the purpose of satisfying itself, as to the correctness, legality or propriety of any finding, sentence or order recorded or passed, and as to the regularity of any proceedings if any such subordinate court”
5. From the above provision, it is clear that the powers of this court in revision of sentences or orders passed by a subordinate court only extend to the purposes of satisfying itself to the correctness, legality or propriety of any finding, sentence or order passed by that subordinate court. The Applicant was sentenced to the minimum sentence stipulated by section 8(4) of the Sexual Offences Act. He has not shown that there was any illegality or irregularity in the sentence so as to call for a review. The application to substitute the sentence with a lesser sentence on ground that the Applicant is now reformed and rehabilitated has no basis.
6. It is also important to note that the applicant has only served a small portion of the sentence and as such he does not merit early release from prison on ground of good behaviour and rehabilitation.
7. In view of the foregoing, I do not find any merit in the application and the same is dismissed.
Delivered, dated and signed at GARSEN this 16 th day of September, 2026
Mr. Oluoch for Respondent
Applicant – present virtually at GK Prison Malindi
Court Assistant – Ms Rahma