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

David Serem v Republic

Serem v Republic (Criminal Revision E128 of 2025) [2025] KEHC 11855 (KLR) (6 August 2025) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 11855 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT ELDORET CRIMINAL REVISION E128 OF 2025 RN NYAKUNDI, J AUGUST 6, 2025 BETWEEN DAVID SEREM ......................................................................................... APPLICANT AND REPUBLIC ............................................................................................ RESPONDENT RULING 1. The applicant herein was charged with the ofience of being in possession of alcoholic drinks chang’aa. The brief facts were that the Applicant on the 11th day of May 2025, at around 0524hrs in Kapkong village in Turbo Sub County within Uasin Gishu County was found being in possession of chang’aa to wit 20 litres without a liquor license. He pleaded guilty to the ofience, convicted and sentenced to a fine of 15,000/= in default 3 months’ imprisonment. Decision 2. The applicant on his own plea of guilty was convicted and sentenced to a fine of 15,000 in default 3 months’ imprisonment. As at the time of this revision on sentence under section 362 & 364 of the CPC he had already completed serving the custodial sentence in default of non-payment 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 Representation: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2025/11855/eng@2025-08-06 1

page 1 of 2

M/s Sidi for the State https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2025/11855/eng@2025-08-06 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.