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

Wilson Ogwan’g Muruka v Republic

Muruka v Republic (Miscellaneous Criminal Application 143 of 2023) [2024] KEHC 4652 (KLR) (29 April 2024) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 4652 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT SIAYA MISCELLANEOUS CRIMINAL APPLICATION 143 OF 2023 DO OGEMBO, J APRIL 29, 2024 BETWEEN WILSON OGWAN’G MURUKA ............................................................ APPLICANT AND REPUBLIC ............................................................................................ RESPONDENT (Being an Application for Sentence Review from Sentence in High Court at Siaya, in Criminal Case No. 1 of 2016 delivered by Hon. Justice J. A. Makau - J, , dated 29{{^th}} June 2017) RULING 1. The Applicant, Wilson Ogwang Muruka has filed the Application dated 10/8//2023 seeking that his sentence be revised to account for the period he spent in remand custody while he awaited the determination of his case. His application is brought under Section 333 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The prosecution has not made any substantive response to the application of the Applicant. 2. I have considered this Application of the Applicant. I have also perused the record of proceedings of the trial court. The same confirm that the Applicant was charged on 4/1/2016 with the ofience of murder contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code. He was tried and convicted of the same. 3. On 29/6/2017, he was sentenced to serve 20 years imprisonment. I have further perused the sentence proceedings of 29/6/2017 in which the trial Judge (Hon. Justicer J.A Makau) clearly noted as follows:“ I have also taken into account the accused has been in custody from December 2015, which is a period of 1 year 5 months todate.” 4. The above clearly confirms that in sentencing the Applicant, the trial Judge duly took into account the period the Applicant took in remand custody. The plea of the Applicant that such period was not accounted for in the sentence is therefore misleading and inaccurate. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2024/4652/eng@2024-04-29 1

page 1 of 2

5. The period spent in remand custody having been considered in the sentence, this application of the Applicant clearly lacks any basis or merit. I dismiss same wholly. It is so ordered. DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED THIS 29TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024. D. O. OGEMBO JUDGE 29/4/2024 COURT Ruling read out in Open Court in presence of the Applicant (Kisumu Maximum) and Ms. Mumu for State. D. O. OGEMBO JUDGE 29/4/2024 https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2024/4652/eng@2024-04-29 2

page 2 of 2

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.