1. The accused herein Sammy Obonyo Owino and Nancy Akinyi Obonyo have been charged with an offence of murder contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code. The particulars are that on the 28 th day of October 2022 at Yualuanda village, Pap Orieng Sub Location in Siaya County jointly with others not before court murdered Clinton Odhiambo . Vide the judgment of this court dated 25/11/2025, both accused were found guilty of the offence of manslaughter contrary to Section 202 as read with Section 205 of the Penal Code and were convicted therefor accordingly.
2. The sentencing hearing proceeded on 15/12/2025. Mr. Oduol for the defence submitted inter alia; that the court do consider the pre-sentence report as filed; that both accused are first offenders and are agreeable to the finding of the court and are remorseful of the incident; that they have sought forgiveness from the family of the deceased; that they implore the court to grant a non-custodial sentence as proposed in the reports; that the court to weigh justice in the matter; that both accused are a couple with a young family; that the first accused is the breadwinner; that a non-custodial sentence be imposed.
3. Mr Soita for the prosecution submitted inter alia; that the second accused is a mother of a young child; that the family of the victim have given their views; that the prosecution is not opposed to the non-custodial sentence.
4. This court called for pre-sentence reports by the Probation department. The same are dated 4/12/2025. As regards the 1 st accused, the report indicates inter alia; that on the fateful day, the 1 st accused had gone to Port Victoria and left home at around 4.00 am; that on his way back, his wife informed him that someone had entered their house and stole her mobile phones and Kshs600/=; that he then called his chief one John Okeyo and briefed him on the incident; that on reaching home, he found his house in disarray and while at home the offender participated in torturing the victim apart from the mob injustice in order for him to produce the stolen items in vain; that the victim finally got the opportunity to go away but that he did not reach home and died on the way; that later the offender herein got arrested together with his wife as the people who had killed the deceased and charged with the offence; that the offender is remorseful and prays for non-custodial sentence; that he has a young family and is the sole bread winner of his family and has siblings to educate; that he is responsible for his mother’s treatment; that his mother indicates that the offender is very hardworking person who has been providing for her family financial needs including educating his siblings; that the offender has never been in conflict with the law before except in this one; that the mother prays that he be considered for non-custodial sentence. In conclusion, the area administrator, family and community members indicate that the offender has never been in conflict with the law before except in this matter; that they pray that this court considers him for non-custodial sentence saying that he is the sole bread winner of his young family and responsible for his siblings’ education and that in his absence, his people are likely to suffer. The family of the deceased through his uncle maintains that the 1 st accused is a proud man who is hot tempered and becomes violent when annoyed and has urged the court to impose a custodial sentence to enable him manage and control his temper.
5. As regards the 2 nd accused, the report indicates inter alia; that the offender went to draw water from the river and locked the door leaving her child who was sleeping on the bed inside their bedroom and upon coming back, she was surprised to find the door opened and upon entering the house she found that her money had been stolen ; that she is remorseful and asks for forgiveness; that she prays for non-custodial sentence as she has never been in conflict with the law except in this matter; that she is a mother with young children who depend on her for upkeep and that her mother in law who could provide for them is ailing and that her parents are deceased; that her family indicates that she is a very respectful lady who loves people and prays the Honourable court grants her non-custodial sentence to enable her go back home and continue providing for her children; that the family of the victim describes the deceased as a neighbour to the offenders herein and that the deceased had been called several times to do manual jobs for the offenders; that the 2 nd accused has been well behaved all along and that the incident was quite unfortunate; that the family, community and area administrator maintain that they have never had any problem with the offender before and are praying for her to be granted non-custodial sentence to enable her go back home and take care of her young children.
6. I have given due consideration to the mitigation submissions of learned counsels and the pre-sentence reports. Under Section 205 of the Penal Code, the maximum sentence for manslaughter is life imprisonment. However, the maximum sentence is usually imposed on the worst form of offenders. Looking at the circumstances of this case, iam of the view that the accused persons do not merit a sentence of life imprisonment. It is noted that the offence was committed while the accused persons and villagers were interrogating and or torturing the deceased over the theft of money from the house of both accused. It had emerged from the evidence that the 2 nd accused organized boda boda operators who flushed out the deceased from a changaa drinking den and took him to the home of both accused where he was tortured until he died. The 1 st accused also joined in the fray and burnt the deceased with a red hot panga. It is clear that both accused and the villagers took the law unto their hands and purported to resort to the law of the jungle yet they were under obligation to hand the deceased to the authorities so that the alleged thief could be dealt with in accordance with the law.
7. It is noted that the circumstances leading to the death of the deceased are tragic in that he died a very violent death. The deceased who was a young man was subjected to untold beatings and torture in the hands of both accused and villagers. The pathologist (PW11) stated that there were superficial burns on the body of the deceased and that he formed the opinion that the cause of death was severe head injury secondary to blunt trauma to the head. The said injuries could not give the deceased a chance to survive.
8. As regards the sentence to be imposed, the Court of Appeal in the case of Charo Ngumbao Gugudu Vs. R [2011] eKLR held as follows:
“Further, the law is that sentence imposed on an accused person must be commensurate to the moral blameworthiness of the offender and that it is not proper exercise for the court to fail to look at the facts and circumstances of the case in their entirety before settling for any given sentence. See Ambani Vs. R [1990] KLR”
8. According to the Judiciary Sentencing Policy Guidelines (2023), sentencing of offenders should take into account the following objectives:
a) Retribution - To punish the offender for their criminal conduct in a just manner.
b) Deterrence - To deter the offender from committing a similar or any other offence in future as well as to discourage the public from committing offences.
c) Rehabilitation - To enable the offender to reform from his/her criminal disposition and become a law-abiding person.
d) Restorative justice - To address the needs arising from the criminal conduct such as loss and damages sustained by the victim or the community and to promote a sense of responsibility through the offender’s contribution towards meeting those needs.
e) Community protection - To protect the community by removing the offender from the community thus avoiding the further perpetuation of the offender’s criminal acts.
f) Denunciation - To clearly communicate the community’s condemnation of the criminal conduct.
g) Reconciliation - To mend the relationship between the offender, the victim and the community.
h) Reintegration - To facilitate the re-entry of the offender into the society.
9. Looking at the circumstances of the offence as well as the pre-sentence reports and the mitigation of the accused persons, it is clear that the 1 st accused requires comprehensive custodial rehabilitation in order to enable him to undergo the requisite rehabilitation so as to work on his anger related issues before being released to the society to serve under probation. I find that a sentence of three (3) years imprisonment is appropriate in the circumstance and which must commence from the date of conviction namely 25/11/2025 as he had been on bond throughout the trial and thereafter to proceed to serve under probation for a period of three (3) years. As regards the 2 nd accused, the pre-sentence report is favourable for a non-custodial sentence due to the fact that she has a young child and needs to go home and take care of the other children. It is noted that it was her husband (1 st accused) who heavily participated in whipping the villagers and conducting the interrogation and torture of the deceased and that her role was minimal. The said 2 nd accused has been in custody since the date of conviction to date and is believed to have learnt valuable lessons and has had time to reflect on this incident. She is believed to have atoned somewhat for her sins. I am of the view that the 2 nd accused herein qualifies for a non-custodial sentence in that it will enable her to take care of her family now that her husband will be serving a custodial sentence.
10. In the result, i order the 1 st accused Sammy Obonyo Owino to serve a custodial sentence of three (3) years which shall commence from the date of conviction namely 25/11/2025 and thereafter to serve under probation for three (3) years. As regards the 2 nd accused Nancy Akinyi Obonyo , i order her to serve under probation for a period of three (3) years. In the event of non-compliance of the probationary order, the probationary order shall be cancelled and the accused ordered to serve custodial sentence for the entire period regardless of the period served under probation.
Orders accordingly.
Dated and delivered at Siaya this day of 14 th day of January 2026.
D. KEMEI
JUDGE
In the presence of:
Sammy Obonyo Owino………1 st Accused.
Nancy Akinyi Obonyo……….2 nd Accused.
Oduol.…………..…for all Accused.
Soita………………..for Prosecution.
Maureen/Kimaiyo.…….Court Assistant.
SIAYA HCCRC NO. E029 OF 2022 RULING 9 | Page
2. The sentencing hearing proceeded on 15/12/2025. Mr. Oduol for the defence submitted inter alia; that the court do consider the pre-sentence report as filed; that both accused are first offenders and are agreeable to the finding of the court and are remorseful of the incident; that they have sought forgiveness from the family of the deceased; that they implore the court to grant a non-custodial sentence as proposed in the reports; that the court to weigh justice in the matter; that both accused are a couple with a young family; that the first accused is the breadwinner; that a non-custodial sentence be imposed.
3. Mr Soita for the prosecution submitted inter alia; that the second accused is a mother of a young child; that the family of the victim have given their views; that the prosecution is not opposed to the non-custodial sentence.
4. This court called for pre-sentence reports by the Probation department. The same are dated 4/12/2025. As regards the 1 st accused, the report indicates inter alia; that on the fateful day, the 1 st accused had gone to Port Victoria and left home at around 4.00 am; that on his way back, his wife informed him that someone had entered their house and stole her mobile phones and Kshs600/=; that he then called his chief one John Okeyo and briefed him on the incident; that on reaching home, he found his house in disarray and while at home the offender participated in torturing the victim apart from the mob injustice in order for him to produce the stolen items in vain; that the victim finally got the opportunity to go away but that he did not reach home and died on the way; that later the offender herein got arrested together with his wife as the people who had killed the deceased and charged with the offence; that the offender is remorseful and prays for non-custodial sentence; that he has a young family and is the sole bread winner of his family and has siblings to educate; that he is responsible for his mother’s treatment; that his mother indicates that the offender is very hardworking person who has been providing for her family financial needs including educating his siblings; that the offender has never been in conflict with the law before except in this one; that the mother prays that he be considered for non-custodial sentence. In conclusion, the area administrator, family and community members indicate that the offender has never been in conflict with the law before except in this matter; that they pray that this court considers him for non-custodial sentence saying that he is the sole bread winner of his young family and responsible for his siblings’ education and that in his absence, his people are likely to suffer. The family of the deceased through his uncle maintains that the 1 st accused is a proud man who is hot tempered and becomes violent when annoyed and has urged the court to impose a custodial sentence to enable him manage and control his temper.
5. As regards the 2 nd accused, the report indicates inter alia; that the offender went to draw water from the river and locked the door leaving her child who was sleeping on the bed inside their bedroom and upon coming back, she was surprised to find the door opened and upon entering the house she found that her money had been stolen ; that she is remorseful and asks for forgiveness; that she prays for non-custodial sentence as she has never been in conflict with the law except in this matter; that she is a mother with young children who depend on her for upkeep and that her mother in law who could provide for them is ailing and that her parents are deceased; that her family indicates that she is a very respectful lady who loves people and prays the Honourable court grants her non-custodial sentence to enable her go back home and continue providing for her children; that the family of the victim describes the deceased as a neighbour to the offenders herein and that the deceased had been called several times to do manual jobs for the offenders; that the 2 nd accused has been well behaved all along and that the incident was quite unfortunate; that the family, community and area administrator maintain that they have never had any problem with the offender before and are praying for her to be granted non-custodial sentence to enable her go back home and take care of her young children.
6. I have given due consideration to the mitigation submissions of learned counsels and the pre-sentence reports. Under Section 205 of the Penal Code, the maximum sentence for manslaughter is life imprisonment. However, the maximum sentence is usually imposed on the worst form of offenders. Looking at the circumstances of this case, iam of the view that the accused persons do not merit a sentence of life imprisonment. It is noted that the offence was committed while the accused persons and villagers were interrogating and or torturing the deceased over the theft of money from the house of both accused. It had emerged from the evidence that the 2 nd accused organized boda boda operators who flushed out the deceased from a changaa drinking den and took him to the home of both accused where he was tortured until he died. The 1 st accused also joined in the fray and burnt the deceased with a red hot panga. It is clear that both accused and the villagers took the law unto their hands and purported to resort to the law of the jungle yet they were under obligation to hand the deceased to the authorities so that the alleged thief could be dealt with in accordance with the law.
7. It is noted that the circumstances leading to the death of the deceased are tragic in that he died a very violent death. The deceased who was a young man was subjected to untold beatings and torture in the hands of both accused and villagers. The pathologist (PW11) stated that there were superficial burns on the body of the deceased and that he formed the opinion that the cause of death was severe head injury secondary to blunt trauma to the head. The said injuries could not give the deceased a chance to survive.
8. As regards the sentence to be imposed, the Court of Appeal in the case of Charo Ngumbao Gugudu Vs. R [2011] eKLR held as follows:
“Further, the law is that sentence imposed on an accused person must be commensurate to the moral blameworthiness of the offender and that it is not proper exercise for the court to fail to look at the facts and circumstances of the case in their entirety before settling for any given sentence. See Ambani Vs. R [1990] KLR”
8. According to the Judiciary Sentencing Policy Guidelines (2023), sentencing of offenders should take into account the following objectives:
a) Retribution - To punish the offender for their criminal conduct in a just manner.
b) Deterrence - To deter the offender from committing a similar or any other offence in future as well as to discourage the public from committing offences.
c) Rehabilitation - To enable the offender to reform from his/her criminal disposition and become a law-abiding person.
d) Restorative justice - To address the needs arising from the criminal conduct such as loss and damages sustained by the victim or the community and to promote a sense of responsibility through the offender’s contribution towards meeting those needs.
e) Community protection - To protect the community by removing the offender from the community thus avoiding the further perpetuation of the offender’s criminal acts.
f) Denunciation - To clearly communicate the community’s condemnation of the criminal conduct.
g) Reconciliation - To mend the relationship between the offender, the victim and the community.
h) Reintegration - To facilitate the re-entry of the offender into the society.
9. Looking at the circumstances of the offence as well as the pre-sentence reports and the mitigation of the accused persons, it is clear that the 1 st accused requires comprehensive custodial rehabilitation in order to enable him to undergo the requisite rehabilitation so as to work on his anger related issues before being released to the society to serve under probation. I find that a sentence of three (3) years imprisonment is appropriate in the circumstance and which must commence from the date of conviction namely 25/11/2025 as he had been on bond throughout the trial and thereafter to proceed to serve under probation for a period of three (3) years. As regards the 2 nd accused, the pre-sentence report is favourable for a non-custodial sentence due to the fact that she has a young child and needs to go home and take care of the other children. It is noted that it was her husband (1 st accused) who heavily participated in whipping the villagers and conducting the interrogation and torture of the deceased and that her role was minimal. The said 2 nd accused has been in custody since the date of conviction to date and is believed to have learnt valuable lessons and has had time to reflect on this incident. She is believed to have atoned somewhat for her sins. I am of the view that the 2 nd accused herein qualifies for a non-custodial sentence in that it will enable her to take care of her family now that her husband will be serving a custodial sentence.
10. In the result, i order the 1 st accused Sammy Obonyo Owino to serve a custodial sentence of three (3) years which shall commence from the date of conviction namely 25/11/2025 and thereafter to serve under probation for three (3) years. As regards the 2 nd accused Nancy Akinyi Obonyo , i order her to serve under probation for a period of three (3) years. In the event of non-compliance of the probationary order, the probationary order shall be cancelled and the accused ordered to serve custodial sentence for the entire period regardless of the period served under probation.
Orders accordingly.
Dated and delivered at Siaya this day of 14 th day of January 2026.
D. KEMEI
JUDGE
In the presence of:
Sammy Obonyo Owino………1 st Accused.
Nancy Akinyi Obonyo……….2 nd Accused.
Oduol.…………..…for all Accused.
Soita………………..for Prosecution.
Maureen/Kimaiyo.…….Court Assistant.
SIAYA HCCRC NO. E029 OF 2022 RULING 9 | Page