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

Gayrod Isanya v Republic

Isanya v Republic (Criminal Revision E156 of 2025) [2025] KEHC 11752 (KLR) (6 August 2025) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 11752 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT ELDORET CRIMINAL REVISION E156 OF 2025 RN NYAKUNDI, J AUGUST 6, 2025 BETWEEN GAYROD ISANYA ................................................................................... APPLICANT AND REPUBLIC ............................................................................................ RESPONDENT RULING 1. The applicant herein was charged of stealing contrary to section 268 as read with 275 of the Penal Code. The brief facts were that the Applicant on the 5th day of April 2025, at Elgon view estate Racecourse location in Kesses sub county within Uasin Gishu County stole one steel water tank, two mattocks, one electric pump, 3 jembes, 5 tarimbos and one sledged hummer a valued at Kshs. 33,450/= the property of Daniel King’ori Githaiga. He pleaded guilty to the ofience, was convicted and sentenced to a fine of 20,000/= in default 6 months’ imprisonment. Decision 2. The applicant on his own plea of guilty was convicted and sentenced to a fine of 20,000 in default 6 months’ imprisonment. As at the time of this revision on sentence under section 362 & 364 of the Criminal Procedure Code, he had already completed serving the custodial sentence in default of nonpayment of fine. The remedy has been spent and nothing for this court to exercise judicial discretion within the enabling provisions of the law. It is so ordered. DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED VIA CTS AT ELDORET THIS 6TH AUGUST 2025 ………………………………….. R. NYAKUNDI JUDGE https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2025/11752/eng@2025-08-06 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.