Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Original judgment

Stephen Muriithi v Republic

REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NANYUKI CRIMINAL REVISION NO.121 OF 2020 (From Original Conviction and Sentence in Nanyuki Criminal Case No.415 of 2020) STEPHEN MURIITHI..................................................................................APPLICANT VERSUS REPUBLIC................................................................................................RESPONDENT 14/07/2020 Coram: Before Waweru, J (In chambers) ORDER IN REVISION 1. Upon application by the convict herein STEPHEN MURIITHI, I have called for and examined the record of the trial court in respect to the sentence meted out.. 2. The convict was convicted upon his own plea of making charcoal in a state forest S/C 67(1)(e) of the Forest Conservation and Management Act, No.34 of 2016. On 11/05/2020 he was sentenced to a fine of Kshs.50,000/00 and in default of payment to serve 12 months imprisonment. He did not pay the fine and is serving the default sentence. 3. The default sentence is clearly illegal. A fine not exceeding Kshs.50,000/00 should not attract a default sentence that exceeds six (6) months imprisonment. See Section 28(2) of the Penal Code. 4. In the circumstances I must set aside the default sentence of twelve (12) months imprisonment. 5. In order to try and decongest our prisons in these COVID-19 times, I will substitute a default sentence of four (4) months imprisonment. It is so ordered. 6. To that limited extent only is the sentence interfered with. GIVEN under my hand and seal of this Honourable Court this 14th day of July 2020 H.P.G. WAWERU JUDGE. ISSUED at NANYUKI this 14th day of July 2020. DEPUTY REGISTRAR NANYUKI HIGH COURT

A note on accuracy. These pages are generated automatically from our AI-written case briefs and have not been checked by a lawyer. Case titles and citations come from Kenya Law; the counts, topics, propositions and “treatment” labels are derived from the briefs and can be incomplete or wrong. Use them as a research aid and always read the original judgment before relying on anything here. This is not legal advice.