State v Matundura (Criminal Case E004 of 2023) [2025] KEHC 19770 (KLR) (26 June 2025) (Sentence) Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 19770 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT KISII CRIMINAL CASE E004 OF 2023 TA ODERA, J JUNE 26, 2025 BETWEEN STATE ................................................................................................... PROSECUTION AND SEBASTIAN MATUNDURA ...................................................................... ACCUSED SENTENCE 1. Sebastian Matundura, the offender herein was initially charged with murder contrary to Section 203 as read with 204 of the Penal Code. He later entered into a plea bargain agreement with the State and the charges were reduced to manslaughter contrary to Section 202 as read with 205 of the Penal Code. He pleaded guilty to manslaughter and he was accordingly convicted in the year 2023. 2. This case is now coming up for sentencing. The court called for a pre-sentence report from the probation office and the same was filed. It gave a social back ground of the offender report and views victim and the community. It recommended a lenient for a lenient custodial sentence. 4. Defence Counsel submitted that the offender is a first offender and is remorseful hence the plea bargain and opts for a non custodial sentence. Prosecution also supported the contention that it was submitted that the offender entered into a plea bargain agreement and save judicial time and so he prayed for leniency. 5. The court is well abreast of the principles on sentencing and the 2016 Judiciary of Kenya sentencing guidelines, The Supreme Court in the case of Francis Karioko Muruatetu & Another v R (2017) set down the following factors to be considered in sentencing in murder trials; a) Age of the offender. b) Being a first offender. c) Whether the offender pleaded guilty. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2025/19770/eng@2025-06-26 1
page 1 of 2
d) Character and record of the offender. e) Commission of the offence in response to gender-based violence. f) Remorsefulness of the offender. g) The possibility of reform and social re-adaptation of the offender. h) Other factor that the court considers relevant. 6. I have considered the age of the offender nature of the offence, its circumstances, the pre-sentence report, mitigation, the remand period is 2 years and five months, the fact that he is remorseful and the sentiments of community. I agree with defence counsel that the offender deserves leniency for entering into a plea bargain agreement and saved the precious judicial time of the court and expedited the determination of the case. The pre-sentence report recommends that he is not fit for a non-custodial sentence and that the offender is in need of a lenient sentence. I agree with the probation report that he is not suitable for a non-custodial sentence. The victim who is the wife to the offender stated that she wanted him jailed and hated deceased as he married her with him. 7. The offender has saved the judicial time and resources. He is entitled to some concession on the sentence. I proceed to sentence the offender to 10 years imprisonment. The sentence to be computed from 9.1.23 when he was first remanded. 14 days Right of appeal. T.A. ODERA JUDGE 26.6.25 Delivered Virtually in the presence of: Offender Nduhukire for the Offender Koima for Prosecution Court Assistant - Kipchirchir https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2025/19770/eng@2025-06-26 2
page 2 of 2