REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MACHAKOS CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 264 OF 2013 DARREN MBITHI KALUNDA ……….……………… APPELLANT VERSUS REPUBLIC (Being an appeal from the conviction and sentence of Hon. R. Rator Resident Magistrate delivered on 24/9/2012 in Makueni Principal Magistrate Criminal Case No. 364 of 2012) ************************************ (Before Hon. B. Thuranira Jaden J) JUDGMENT 1. The Appellant, Darren Mbithi Kalunda was charged with House breaking contrary to section 304 (1) and stealing from a dwelling house contrary to section 279 (b) of the Penal Code. The particulars of the offence were that on the 8 th day of September 2012 at about 7.00 p.m. at Westlands Estate, Unoa Sub-location, Wote Township, Wote Location in Makueni County, broke and entered into a dwelling house of Victoria Murugi Kivuti with intent to steal from therein and did steal there in one DVD player make LG, remote control, one C.D and cash Kshs. 2,500/= all valued at Kshs. 6,700/= the property of the said Victoria Murugi Kivuti. 2. The charge was read out to the Appellant and all the essential ingredients explained to him and he pleaded guilty in all the counts. The interpretation is reflected as English, Kiswahili and Kikamba. The facts were read out and the Appellant accepted the same as correct. The trial court followed all procedures of plea taking [See Adan –vs- Republic 1973 EA 445]. 3. The record reflects that there was a court clerk in court. The Appellant participated in the trial and even mitigated. As held by the Court of Appeal in the case of Said Hassan Nuno v Republic [2010] eKLR- Nyeri Criminal Appeal 322 of 2006:“We take judicial notice that one of the core duties of a court clerk is to offer interpretation services to accused or even to the court where it does not understand the language of the accused; or a witness to the case.” 4. Section 348 of the Criminal Procedure Code provides as follows:“No appeal shall be allowed in the case of an accused person who has pleaded guilty and has been convicted on that plea by a subordinate court, except as to the extent or legality of the sentence.”
page 1 of 2
5. The Appellant was sentenced to fourteen (14) years imprisonment in the 1 st limb and ten (10) years in the 2nd limb. The sentences were to run concurrently. 6. Although the sentence in each count is within the law, the same is harsh and excessive. Consequently, I am persuaded to reduce the same to the period already served. ……………………………………… B. THURANIRA JADEN JUDGE Dated and delivered at Machakos this 28th day of May 2014. ……………………………………… B. THURANIRA JADEN JUDGE
page 2 of 2