REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KAKAMEGA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 51 OF 2019 ISAAC SHIRANDE DAVID................................................................................APPLICANT VERSUS REPUBLIC.........................................................................................................RESPONDENT RULING 1. This matter was placed before me for the purpose of giving directions, in view of the recent decision by the Supreme Court in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic; Katiba Institute & 5 others (Amicus Curiae [2021] (Koome CJ&P, Mwilu DCJ&VP, Ibrahim, Wanjala, Ndung’u & Lenaola SSJJ), with respect to mandatory sentences, where it was clarified that the decision, in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic [2017] eKLR (Maraga CJ&P, Mwilu DCJ&VP, Ojwang, Wanjala, Njoki and Lenaola SCJJ), had arisen from proceedings relating to murder, under section 204 of the Penal Code, Cap 63, Laws of Kenya, and the position stated in the said decision was intended to apply only to mandatory sentences with respect to murder cases. 2. The petition herein, undated, filed herein on 22nd May 2019, is principally founded on the decision, in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic [2017] eKLR (Maraga CJ&P, Mwilu DCJ&VP, Ojwang, Wanjala, Njoki and Lenaola SCJJ), for the applicant seeks review of his sentence, where he had been convicted of robbery with violence, contrary to section 296(2) of the Penal Code, in Vihiga PMCCRC No. 128 of 2002, and was sentenced to death, which was later commuted to life imprisonment by the President of the Republic of Kenya. He filed appeals in Kakamega HCCRA No. 269 of 2011 and Kisumu CACRA No. 39 of 2013, both of which were dismissed. 3. The offence, the subject of the instant proceedings, is not murder, but robbery with violence, as defined in Section 296(2) of the Penal Code, the decision in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic [2017] eKLR (Maraga CJ&P, Mwilu DCJ&VP, Ojwang, Wanjala, Njoki and Lenaola SCJJ), therefore, does not apply to it. As a consequence, the High Court has no jurisdiction to review the sentence that was imposed by the trial court, in view of the directions given in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another vs. Republic; Katiba Institute & 5 others (Amicus Curiae [2021] (Koome CJ&P, Mwilu DCJ&VP, Ibrahim, Wanjala, Ndung’u & Lenaola SSJJ). The application and petition are incompetent. 4. The Deputy Registrar shall cause copies of this ruling to be availed to the petitioner and the office of Director of Public Prosecutions, Kakamega. PREPARED, DATED AND SIGNED AT KAKAMEGA THIS 14TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 W MUSYOKA 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.