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

Evans Maroko v Director of Public Prosecutions

Maroko v Director of Public Prosecutions (Criminal Miscellaneous Application E039 of 2025) [2025] KEHC 18368 (KLR) (20 November 2025) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 18368 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT NYAMIRA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION E039 OF 2025 TW CHERERE, J NOVEMBER 20, 2025 BETWEEN EVANS MAROKO .................................................................................... APPLICANT AND DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS .................................... RESPONDENT RULING 1. The Applicant has moved this Court by way of an application seeking revision of sentence pursuant to Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. He contends that the trial court failed to take into account the period he spent in custody prior to conviction. The Respondent raised no objection to the application. 2. The record shows that the Applicant was charged with the offence of grievous harm contrary to section 234 of the Penal Code in Nyamira Criminal Case No. E1264 of 2015 and was convicted and sentenced to thirty (30) years’ imprisonment on 31st July 2019. 3. Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code provides as follows: “ Subject to the provisions of section 38 of the Penal Code every sentence shall be deemed to commence from, and to include the whole of the day of, the date on which it was pronounced, except where otherwise provided in this Code. Provided that where the person sentenced under subsection (1) has, prior to such sentence, been held in custody, the sentence shall take account of the period spent in custody.” 4. Clause 2.3.18 of the Sentencing Policy Guidelines similarly obliges courts to consider the period already spent in custody, noting that failure to do so undermines proportionality and may result in an excessive sentence. The Guidelines emphasise that this requirement applies even to offences attracting minimum sentences and to accused persons who remained in custody due to inability to meet bail terms. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2025/18368/eng@2025-11-20 1

page 1 of 2

5. The Court of Appeal in Ahmad Abolfathi Mohammed & Another v Republic (2018) eKLR stated: “ By dint of section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, the court was obliged to take into account the period that they had spent in custody before they were sentenced… Taking into account the period spent in custody must mean considering that period so that the imposed sentence is reduced proportionately by the period already spent in custody. It is not enough for the court to merely state that it has taken into account the period already spent in custody and still order the sentence to run from the date of conviction…” 6. Similarly, in Bethwel Wilson Kibor v Republic [2009] eKLR, the Court of Appeal reiterated that: “ By proviso to section 333(2) … where a person sentenced has been held in custody prior to such sentence, the sentence shall take account of the period spent in custody.” 7. In the present case, the trial court record confirms that the Applicant was arrested on 28th October 2015 and remained in custody continuously until his conviction on 31st July 2019. The record does not indicate that the trial court credited the Applicant with the four years and nine months spent in custody. 8. Having considered the application, the supporting affidavit, the relevant law and authorities, and noting that the Respondent does not oppose the application, the Court is satisfied that the Applicant is entitled to the relief sought. Disposition 9. In light of the foregoing, the Court makes the following orders: 1. Pursuant to Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, the Applicant’s sentence of thirty (30) years’ imprisonment shall be computed as commencing on 28th October 2015, being the date of the Applicant’s arrest and initial detention in custody. 2. The prison authorities shall effect the recalculation of the Applicant’s sentence in accordance with this ruling. Orders accordingly. DELIVERED AT NYAMIRA THIS 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025 WAMAE. T. W. CHERERE JUDGE Appearances Court Assistant - Hilda Applicant - Present For the DPP - Mr. Chirchir https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2025/18368/eng@2025-11-20 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.