REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KITALE REVISION NO. 62 OF 2021 JULIUS OMONYA KAWESA................................APPLICANT VERSUS REPUBLIC..........................................................RESPONDENT RULING The Applicant, Julius Omanya Kawesa, was charged with three (3) counts under the Traffic Act. He was charged with driving a Motor Vehicle on a Public road under the influence of alcohol contrary to Section 44(1). He was also charged with driving Motor Vehicle on Public road without a driving licence contrary to Section 30(1) (7). He was finally charged with the offence of unauthorized driving contrary to Section 103 C (1) (3). The particulars of the offence related to the Applicant’s arrest on 13 th February 2021 along KitaleEndebess road while driving a public service vehicle. Upon being presented to court, he pleaded guilty to all the charges. He was sentence to pay a total fine of Kshs 40,000/= or in default serve Seven (7) months imprisonment. The Applicant did not pay the fine. He is serving the default custodial sentence. He has applied to have the default custodial sentence revised so that he can be released from prison taking into account the period he has been in lawful custody. This court ordered for a probation report to be prepared. The same was prepared and filed in court. It is favourable. Taking into account the period that the Applicant has been in prison, this court formed the view that the Applicant has been sufficiently punished. He has paid his just debts to the society. In the premises therefore, the default custodial sentence imposed upon him is commuted to the period served. He is ordered set at liberty and released from Prison forthwith unless otherwise lawfully held. It is so ordered. DATED at KITALE this 9th day of June 2021. L. KIMARU JUDGE
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.