Republic v Arengenyang (Criminal Case E012 of 2025) [2025] KEHC 19357 (KLR) (18 December 2025) (Sentence) Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 19357 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT KAPENGURIA CRIMINAL CASE E012 OF 2025 RPV WENDOH, J DECEMBER 18, 2025 BETWEEN REPUBLIC ............................................................................................ PROSECUTOR AND MONICAH ARENGENYANG .................................................................... ACCUSED SENTENCE 1. The accused Monicah Arengenyang had been charged with offence of Murder contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code. After trial, she was found guilty and convicted for the offence of Manslaughter contrary to Section 202 as read with Section 205 of the Penal Code. 2. The matter is now before me for sentence. Sentencing is an exercise of the court’s discretion guided by the Constitution and other relevant laws of the land. This court is also guided by the 2016 Judiciary of Kenya Sentencing Policy Guidelines. Despite the importance of the said Guidelines, sentencing remains the exercise of judicial discretion as was stated by the Supreme Court in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & another v Republic [2017] eKLR. The court stated:“ (72) 3. we wish to make it very clear that these guidelines in no way replace judicial discretion. They are advisory and not mandatory. They are geared to promoting consistency and transparency in sentencing hearings. They are also aimed at promoting public understanding of the sentencing process”. Page 15, paragraph 4.1 of the Sentencing Policy Guidelines provides as follows:i. Retribution: to punish the offender for his/her criminal conduct in a just manner; ii. Deterrence; to deter the offender from committing a similar offence subsequently as well as to discourage other people from committing similar offences; https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2025/19357/eng@2025-12-18 1
page 1 of 3
4. iii. Rehabilitation; to enable the offender reform from his/her criminal disposition and become a law-abiding person; iv. Restorative justice; to address the needs arising from the criminal conduct such as loss and damages; v. Community Protection; to police the community by incapacitating the offender. vi. Denunciation; to communicate the community’s condemnation of the criminal conduct. vii. Reconciliation; to mend the relationship between the offender the victim and the community. viii. Reintegration; To facilitate the re-entry of the offender into the society. In sentencing, the court also considers various mitigating factors (See Muruatetu Case). 1. Age of the offender; 2. Being a first offender; 3. Whether the offender pleaded guilty; 4. Character and record of the offender; 5. Commission of the offence in response to gender-based violence; 6. Remorsefulness of the offender; 7. The possibility of reform and social re-adaptation of the offender; 8. Any other factor that the court considers relevant. 5. The prosecutor treated the accused as a first offender. The accused’s counsel Mr. Ndinyo mitigated on her behalf. He stated that the accused is remorseful, has four children for whom she is the sole breadwinner; that the deceased was her nephew who she educated and got him assistance to join university; that they had lived peacefully till the deceased started to take alcohol and became violent; that she has spent 3 years in remand and has reformed and prays for leniency. 6. The court has considered the fact that accused was treated as a first offender, her mitigation that she has children for whom she is the sole breadwinner and that she is remorseful and pleads for leniency. 7. The court has also read the presentence report in which it was pointed out that accused was intoxicated at the time of committing the offence and the chief of the area was concerned about her habits of indulging in alcohol. The court has also considered the circumstances under which the offence was committed. There is no animosity from the community and probation was recommended. 8. However, the offence committed is a very serious one a young life was taken away through the reckless acts of the accused. She must be able to take control of her actions when drunk. In that event, this court prefers a deterrent sentence and hereby sentences accused to eight (8) years imprisonment. The sentence will commence on 20/9/2022, when she was arraigned before the court. DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED AT KAPENGURIA THIS 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 R. WENDOH JUDGE Ruling delivered in the presence of:- https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2025/19357/eng@2025-12-18 2
page 2 of 3
Mr. Mokaya for state Mr. Ndinyo for accused Accused - Present Juma/Hellen – Court Assistants https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2025/19357/eng@2025-12-18 3
page 3 of 3