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

Risper Murugi Namu v Republic

Namu v Republic (Criminal Revision 15 of 2024) [2024] KEHC 2458 (KLR) (6 March 2024) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 2458 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT KIBERA CRIMINAL REVISION 15 OF 2024 DR KAVEDZA, J MARCH 6, 2024 BETWEEN RISPER MURUGI NAMU ...................................................................... APPLICANT AND REPUBLIC ............................................................................................ RESPONDENT RULING 1. The applicant was charged and pleaded guilty on 3 counts of the ofience of stealing contrary to section 268 (1) as read with section 275 of the Penal Code. She was sentenced to pay a fine of Kshs. 40,000, Kshs. 15,000 and Kshs. 50,000 respectively for the three counts. In default she was to serve, 6 months, 3 months and 6 months imprisonment on each count. She filed an application seeking sentence review. She urged the court to grant a non-custodial sentence. 2. The court called for a probation report which was filed on 5th March 2024. I note that the same was not favourable. The probation officer did not recommend a non – custodial sentence. 3. Having considered the application in its totality, I note that before sentencing, the trial court called for and considered the pre-sentencing report. The sentence imposed was also legal and lenient in the circumstances. 4. In my view I find no good cause or reason to revise the sentence imposed by the trial court. The applicant is directed to serve the remainder of her sentence. Orders accordingly. RULING DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY THIS 6TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 D. KAVEDZA JUDGE https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2024/2458/eng@2024-03-06 1

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.