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

Dennis Otieno & Another v Republic

Otieno & another v Republic (Criminal Miscellaneous Application E084 of 2025) [2025] KEHC 19460 (KLR) (10 November 2025) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 19460 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT HOMA BAY CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION E084 OF 2025 PJO OTIENO, J NOVEMBER 10, 2025 BETWEEN DENNIS OTIENO & ANOTHER .......................................................... APPLICANT AND REPUBLIC ............................................................................................ RESPONDENT RULING 1. The record availed show that the applicant were arrested on 22/8/2019 and arraigned in court on the 26/8/2019 when they were granted bond terms. 2. However, the said bonds were cancelled on the 23/10/2019 after both absconded. The two thus remained in remand custody till the date of conviction and sentence. 3. The calculation by the court revealed that the applicant were therefore in custody between 22/8/2019 and 26/8/2019 and again between 23/10/2019 and 6/12/2019. The court calculates the days spent in custody to be 50 days. 4. In accordance with the dictates of section 333(2) CPC, that period must be taken into account to proportionately reduce the prison term. 5. The court therefore directs that in computing the sentence of 20 years being served by the applicants, the same be proportionately reduced by a period of 50 days. 6. It is so ordered 7. Let the court file be closed. DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED THIS 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025. PATRICK J O OTIENO https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2025/19460/eng@2025-11-10 1

page 1 of 2

JUDGE 10/11/2025 https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2025/19460/eng@2025-11-10 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.