Isaya v Republic (Criminal Revision E124 of 2025) [2025] KEHC 18871 (KLR) (18 December 2025) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 18871 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT KIBERA CRIMINAL REVISION E124 OF 2025 DR KAVEDZA, J DECEMBER 18, 2025 BETWEEN PETER INGATIA ISAYA ......................................................................... APPLICANT AND REPUBLIC ............................................................................................ RESPONDENT RULING 1. The applicant was charged and after a full trial convicted for two counts of offences: vandalism of energy installation and infrastructure contrary to section 169(1)(b) of the Energy Act and escape from lawful custody contrary to section 123 as read with section 36 of the Penal Code. He was sentence to pay a fine of Kshs.100,000 in default to serve 1 year imprisonment and Kshs. 50,000 in default to serve 6 months imprisonment respectively. 2. He has filed the present application undated application seeking revision of sentence. The grounds raised are that the court failed to consider the time spent in remand custody. 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 applicant’s mitigation, the time spent in remand custody and the fact that the applicant was a first offender 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 I find no good cause or reason to revise the sentence imposed by the trial court. The application dismissed. RULING DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY THIS 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2025 D. KAVEDZA JUDGE https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2025/18871/eng@2025-12-18 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.