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

kehc-2025-10110

Kamweru & another v Republic (Miscellaneous Criminal Application E076 of 2025) [2025] KEHC 10110 (KLR) (15 July 2025) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 10110 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT KIBERA MISCELLANEOUS CRIMINAL APPLICATION E076 OF 2025 DR KAVEDZA, J JULY 15, 2025 BETWEEN GEORGE KIMANI KAMWERU ...................................................... 1ST APPLICANT MICHAEL NJENGA NGANGA ....................................................... 2ND APPLICANT AND REPUBLIC ............................................................................................ RESPONDENT RULING 1. The applicants were charged and after a full trial convicted for the ofience of kidnapping contrary to section 259 of the Penal Code. They were each sentenced to serve 10 years imprisonment. 2. He filed the present undated application seeking sentence review. The period of four years already spent incarceration is sufficient rehabilitation. 3. I have considered the application, the grounds in support and the applicable law. From the record of the trial court, the court considered the applicants mitigation, the time spent in remand custody and the fact that the applicants were first ofienders before sentencing. Having considered the application in its totality. The sentence imposed was also legal in the circumstances of the case. 4. In my view of the foregoing, I find no good cause or reason to revise the sentence imposed by the trial court. The application dismissed for lacking in merit. Orders accordingly. RULING DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY THIS 15TH DAY OF JULY 2025 D. KAVEDZA JUDGE https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2025/10110/eng@2025-07-15 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.