Anabaka v Republic (Criminal Revision 61 of 2024) [2025] KEHC 1500 (KLR) (14 February 2025) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 1500 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT KIBERA CRIMINAL REVISION 61 OF 2024 DR KAVEDZA, J FEBRUARY 14, 2025 BETWEEN ASMAN KHATA ANABAKA ................................................................. APPLICANT AND REPUBLIC ............................................................................................ RESPONDENT RULING 1. The applicant was charged with two counts for the ofience of robbery with violence contrary to section 295 as read with section 296(2) of the Penal Code. In both counts, the applicant committed the ofience while armed with crude weapons namely pistols and knives and during the robbery he used violence against the complainant. 2. In 2018, he filed a revision application no. 120 of 2018 challenging the constitutionality of the mandatory death sentence that was imposed by the trial court. Consequently, the applicant was resentenced to 20 years imprisonment on 26th of April 2019 by the lower court. He has now filed the present application before this court. 3. Considering the nature of the ofiences that the applicant committed and the aggravating circumstances, it is my view that the sentence of 20 years imprisonment is appropriate for the ofience. 4. I therefore find that the application is an abuse of the court process and it is hereby dismissed. 5. The applicant is bared from filing any similar application without the leave of this court. Orders accordingly. RULING DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY THIS 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025 D. KAVEDZA JUDGE https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2025/1500/eng@2025-02-14 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.