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

Kuria v Republic

Kuria v Republic (Criminal Appeal 21 of 2023) [2024] KEHC 4578 (KLR) (6 May 2024) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 4578 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT KIBERA CRIMINAL APPEAL 21 OF 2023 DR KAVEDZA, J MAY 6, 2024 BETWEEN PETER MWANGI KURIA ...................................................................... APPELLANT AND REPUBLIC ............................................................................................ RESPONDENT RULING 1. I have considered the notice of motion dated 6th May 2024 filed under certificate of urgency, and the affidavit in support sworn by the applicant. In the said application, the applicant is seeking to arrest judgement set to be delivered on 7th May 2024. The applicant has put forth the following reasons for consideration: he sufiers from Prostate Hypertrophy, acute cystitis, and kidney disease, along with experiencing blurred vision. Additionally, he asserts his age of 78 years and requests the court to grant a non-custodial sentence. 2. After thorough consideration of the application, it is evident that the applicant seeks to present his mitigation under the guise of a motion to arrest judgment. However, the applicant has failed to provide any specific grounds justifying the court's intervention to arrest the forthcoming judgment. Having duly considered the application, the following orders are hereby made: 1. The application is not certified urgent. 2. The prayer sought to arrest the impending judgement is dismissed. RULING DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY IN THE ABSENCE OF THE PARTIES THIS 6TH DAY OF MAY 2024 _______________ D. KAVEDZA JUDGE https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2024/4578/eng@2024-05-06 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.