Momanyi v Republic (Criminal Revision E125 of 2024) [2025] KEHC 3699 (KLR) (26 March 2025) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 3699 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT KIBERA CRIMINAL REVISION E125 OF 2024 DR KAVEDZA, J MARCH 26, 2025 BETWEEN LAMECK MOGOYA MOMANYI .......................................................... APPLICANT AND REPUBLIC ............................................................................................ RESPONDENT RULING 1. This file was opened for purposes of considering whether the convict Lameck Mogoya Momanyi is suitable for consideration of his sentence review in the spirit of prison decongestion pursuant to the Chief Justice Memo dated 7th December 2022. 2. The applicant was convicted of defilement contrary to section 8(1) as read with section 8(2) of the Sexual Offences Act No. 3 of 2006. He was sentenced to thirty (30) years imprisonment. 3. Rom the record in the trial court file, it is clear that the complainant was only seven years old at the time the offense occurred. The applicant's heinous actions caused significant trauma to the complainant’s health, further emphasizing the severity of the offence. After reviewing the circumstances surrounding the applicant's conviction, it is evident that the crime committed is of a very serious nature. Additionally, the probation report regarding the applicant is not favourable, further supporting the decision. 4. I hereby find that the applicant is not eligible for early release. The applicant is ordered to serve the remainder of his sentence to completion. Orders accordingly. RULING DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY THIS 26TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 D. KAVEDZA JUDGE https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2025/3699/eng@2025-03-26 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.