1. This matter is placed before this court for review of sentence under Articles 50(2)(q) and 165(6) and (7) of the Constitution of Kenya, sections 362 and 364(1)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap. 75) Laws of Kenya, the Probation of Offenders Act (Cap. 64) Laws of Kenya, section 3(1) of the Community Service Orders Act (Cap. 93) Laws of Kenya and pursuant to the Directions by the Honourable the Chief Justice in Her Memo dated 19/8/2024 on decongestion of prisons.
2. The offender was convicted and sentenced by the Magistrate’s Court at Kwale on his own plea of guilty on 4/4/2024 on a charge of house breaking contrary to section 304(1) and stealing contrary to section 279(b) of the Penal Code (Cap. 63) Laws of Kenya that he broke and entered the building used as a dwelling house by Alexander Sang’alo Isaiah and stole a TV set Sunking 24” and a mobile phone make neon ray valued at KShs 74,000/= the property of Alexander S. Isaiah. The items were not recovered. He was sentenced to serve 3 years imprisonment to run from date of arrest on 16/2/2024. It appears that the learned magistrate only sentenced the offender on one of the limbs and forgot the second limb of the offence charged.
3. In my understanding, review of sentence for purposes of decongestion of prisons may be undertaken under the provisions of Article 50(2)(q) of the Constitution which provides that: -
“Every accused person has the right to a fair trial, which includes the right - if convicted, to appeal to, or apply for review by, a higher Court as prescribed by the law.”
4. In conjunction with that provision, Article 165(6) and (7) of the Constitution which gives the High Court supervisory jurisdiction over subordinate courts can be invoked to call for magistrate’s court file to the High Court for its consideration. It provides as follows:
“(6) The High Court has supervisory jurisdiction over the subordinate courts and over any person, body or authority exercising a judicial or quasi-judicial function, but not over a superior court.
(7) For the purposes of clause (6), the High Court may call for the record of any proceedings before any subordinate court or person, body or authority referred to in clause (6), and may make any order or give any direction it considers appropriate to ensure the fair administration of justice.”
5. The supervisory jurisdiction is expounded under sections 362 and 364 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap. 75) Laws of Kenya as follows:
362. Power of High Court to call for records
The High Court may call for 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 of any such subordinate court.
364. Powers of High Court on revision
(1) In the case of a proceeding in a subordinate court the record of which has been called for or which has been reported for orders, or which otherwise comes to its knowledge, the High Court may—
(a) …
(b) in the case of any other order other than an order of acquittal, alter or reverse the order.
(c) …
6. On the foregoing provisions of the law, this court, upon calling for and considering the proceedings before the Magistrataes Court can review a sentence to a lesser one if satisfied that it is in the interest of justice to do so.
7. Following the Honourable the Chief Justices Directions on decongestion of prisons, this court called for and has perused the trial court file proceedings.
8. It is noted that before sentencing, the prosecution informed the trial court that the accused person was a first offender.
9. In mitigation, the offender asked for lenience. The trial court did not call for a pre-sentence report before passing the sentence. Although not mandatory, such a report is desirable in order to inform the court of the personal circumstances of the offender, the victim of the offence and the community in which the offender resides and the offence was committed. It will then assist the court in passing an appropriate sentence. The report becomes even more imperative where under Article 50(2)(q) of the Constitution and section 364(1)(b) a higher court may have to consider the case for review of the sentence such as in the present case.
10. The offender was sentenced to serve 3 years imprisonment. He has so far served 9 months in prison.
11. The sentence review report filed in this court by Salim Ali Mazang’ang’a, Probation Officer on 15/10/2024 following this court’s request for the same indicates that the offender is now suitable for a non-custodial sentence and recommends that he be committed probation.
12. The offender is aged 36 years, He has been in custody for about 9 months of his prison term including remand period. He has no previous record of offending. The report indicates that he has deeply reflected upon his offending behavior and he has acknowledged and taken accountability of his behaviour.
13. Article 165(7) of the Constitution provides that in exercise of its supervisory mandate, the High Court may make any order or give any direction it considers appropriate to ensure the fair administration of justice while section 364(1)(b) donates authority to this court to alter an order made by a magistrate’s court. Fair administration of justice, requires that a sentence be commensurate to the facts of the case.
14. In this case, although the offences are serious and carry a severe penalty, it is noted that the value of the property stolen is not high and there were no aggravating circumstances in the commission of the offence. I find that this is a case deserving of a sentence review to a non-custodial sentence. I believe that for the period spent in custody, the offender has learned that breaking the law can attract dire consequences. I find that the period served is sufficient for that purpose.
15. Consequently, the offender’s remainder term of imprisonment is reviewed to a non-custodial sentence. He is hereby placed on probation for a period of 1½ years. He is accordingly released to the Kwale Probation and Aftercare department to start his probation.
16. Orders accordingly.
Ruling, Dated and Delivered at Kwale this 7th day of November, 2024.
ANDAYI W. F.
JUDGE
Ruling transmitted to prison authorities electronically to be given effect immediately.
2. The offender was convicted and sentenced by the Magistrate’s Court at Kwale on his own plea of guilty on 4/4/2024 on a charge of house breaking contrary to section 304(1) and stealing contrary to section 279(b) of the Penal Code (Cap. 63) Laws of Kenya that he broke and entered the building used as a dwelling house by Alexander Sang’alo Isaiah and stole a TV set Sunking 24” and a mobile phone make neon ray valued at KShs 74,000/= the property of Alexander S. Isaiah. The items were not recovered. He was sentenced to serve 3 years imprisonment to run from date of arrest on 16/2/2024. It appears that the learned magistrate only sentenced the offender on one of the limbs and forgot the second limb of the offence charged.
3. In my understanding, review of sentence for purposes of decongestion of prisons may be undertaken under the provisions of Article 50(2)(q) of the Constitution which provides that: -
“Every accused person has the right to a fair trial, which includes the right - if convicted, to appeal to, or apply for review by, a higher Court as prescribed by the law.”
4. In conjunction with that provision, Article 165(6) and (7) of the Constitution which gives the High Court supervisory jurisdiction over subordinate courts can be invoked to call for magistrate’s court file to the High Court for its consideration. It provides as follows:
“(6) The High Court has supervisory jurisdiction over the subordinate courts and over any person, body or authority exercising a judicial or quasi-judicial function, but not over a superior court.
(7) For the purposes of clause (6), the High Court may call for the record of any proceedings before any subordinate court or person, body or authority referred to in clause (6), and may make any order or give any direction it considers appropriate to ensure the fair administration of justice.”
5. The supervisory jurisdiction is expounded under sections 362 and 364 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap. 75) Laws of Kenya as follows:
362. Power of High Court to call for records
The High Court may call for 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 of any such subordinate court.
364. Powers of High Court on revision
(1) In the case of a proceeding in a subordinate court the record of which has been called for or which has been reported for orders, or which otherwise comes to its knowledge, the High Court may—
(a) …
(b) in the case of any other order other than an order of acquittal, alter or reverse the order.
(c) …
6. On the foregoing provisions of the law, this court, upon calling for and considering the proceedings before the Magistrataes Court can review a sentence to a lesser one if satisfied that it is in the interest of justice to do so.
7. Following the Honourable the Chief Justices Directions on decongestion of prisons, this court called for and has perused the trial court file proceedings.
8. It is noted that before sentencing, the prosecution informed the trial court that the accused person was a first offender.
9. In mitigation, the offender asked for lenience. The trial court did not call for a pre-sentence report before passing the sentence. Although not mandatory, such a report is desirable in order to inform the court of the personal circumstances of the offender, the victim of the offence and the community in which the offender resides and the offence was committed. It will then assist the court in passing an appropriate sentence. The report becomes even more imperative where under Article 50(2)(q) of the Constitution and section 364(1)(b) a higher court may have to consider the case for review of the sentence such as in the present case.
10. The offender was sentenced to serve 3 years imprisonment. He has so far served 9 months in prison.
11. The sentence review report filed in this court by Salim Ali Mazang’ang’a, Probation Officer on 15/10/2024 following this court’s request for the same indicates that the offender is now suitable for a non-custodial sentence and recommends that he be committed probation.
12. The offender is aged 36 years, He has been in custody for about 9 months of his prison term including remand period. He has no previous record of offending. The report indicates that he has deeply reflected upon his offending behavior and he has acknowledged and taken accountability of his behaviour.
13. Article 165(7) of the Constitution provides that in exercise of its supervisory mandate, the High Court may make any order or give any direction it considers appropriate to ensure the fair administration of justice while section 364(1)(b) donates authority to this court to alter an order made by a magistrate’s court. Fair administration of justice, requires that a sentence be commensurate to the facts of the case.
14. In this case, although the offences are serious and carry a severe penalty, it is noted that the value of the property stolen is not high and there were no aggravating circumstances in the commission of the offence. I find that this is a case deserving of a sentence review to a non-custodial sentence. I believe that for the period spent in custody, the offender has learned that breaking the law can attract dire consequences. I find that the period served is sufficient for that purpose.
15. Consequently, the offender’s remainder term of imprisonment is reviewed to a non-custodial sentence. He is hereby placed on probation for a period of 1½ years. He is accordingly released to the Kwale Probation and Aftercare department to start his probation.
16. Orders accordingly.
Ruling, Dated and Delivered at Kwale this 7th day of November, 2024.
ANDAYI W. F.
JUDGE
Ruling transmitted to prison authorities electronically to be given effect immediately.