Igoko v Republic (Criminal Revision E018 of 2025) [2025] KEHC 19590 (KLR) (17 December 2025) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 19590 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT MURANG'A CRIMINAL REVISION E018 OF 2025 CW GITHUA, J DECEMBER 17, 2025 BETWEEN NAHASON KURIA IGOKO ................................................................... APPLICANT AND REPUBLIC ............................................................................................ RESPONDENT RULING 1. The applicant, Nahashon Kuria Igoko applied for review of sentence imposed on him in Kangema Criminal Case No.MCCR/E092 of 2025. 2. The trial court’s record reveals that the applicant was convicted on his own plea of guilty with the offence of assault causing actual bodily harm contrary to Section 251 of the Penal Code. He was sentenced to serve three years imprisonment. 3. At the hearing, the applicant beseeched this court to revise his aforesaid sentence and substitute it with a non-custodial sentence on grounds that he had now realized his mistake and had learnt from it; that he was now rehabilitated and a changed man and that he had reconciled with the victim of his offence who was his sister in law together with her husband who was his brother. 4. The respondent through learned prosecution counsel Ms. Manyal did not oppose the application. 5. Given the reasons advanced by the applicant in support of his application, I called for a current sentence review report which was filed on 4th December 2025. The report confirms that the applicant had indeed reconciled with the victim who has now forgiven him. 6. Be that as it may, having read the record of the trial court, I find that in sentencing the applicant, the learned trial magistrate erred as he did not seek to find out and therefore did not consider whether or not the applicant was a first or a repeat offender. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2025/19590/eng@2025-12-17 1
page 1 of 2
7. The learned trial magistrate also appears to have misinterpreted the applicant’s plea in mitigation which was basically discussing the circumstances in which the offence was committed but he interpreted it to mean that the applicant was not remorseful. This must have informed the trial court’s decision of meting out a sentence of three years imprisonment which in my view was excessive given the nature of the offence and the fact that it had not been established that the applicant was not a first offender. 8. For all the foregoing reasons, I find merit in the instant application and it is hereby allowed. The sentence of the trial court is hereby revised and set aside. It is substituted with an order placing the applicant on probation for one year with effect from today. While on probation, the applicant to undergo counselling on anger management. It is so ordered. DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT MURANGA THIS 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2025. HON. C. W. GITHUA JUDGE In the presence of: Applicant – virtually Ms Muriu for the Respondent Ms. Susan Waiganjo – Court Assistant https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2025/19590/eng@2025-12-17 2
page 2 of 2