Ekiru v Republic (Civil Revision E021 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 566 (KLR) (Civ) (22 January 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 566 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT ISIOLO CIVIL CIVIL REVISION E021 OF 2025 SC CHIRCHIR, J JANUARY 22, 2026 BETWEEN EMMANUEL EKIRU ............................................................................... APPLICANT AND REPUBLIC ............................................................................................ RESPONDENT RULING 1. Through the Notice of Motion dated 22/08/2025 the Applicant herein seeks for review of sentence. The Application is premised on Article 50(2) (a) and 165 (3) (6) of the Constitution and Section 362, 364 and 333 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) 2. The Applicant pleads that he is a young man of 20 years, is remorseful for the offence, and that he is ready to take care of the victim who is now an adult, and the child born out of the rape. He further prays that the court considers the period he spent in custody prior to conviction. 3. The Respondent opposes the application. Through the grounds of opposition dated 06/10/2025, it is stated that the 10 year- sentence imposed on the Applicant was lenient in the face of the prescribed minimum sentence of 15 years; that he has not demonstrated that the trial court acted on wrong principles while passing the sentence, and that there are no other valid reasons advanced for the review. Determination 4. The review jurisdiction of the high court is founded on Article 165 (6) of the constitution and Section 362 to 367 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The role of the high court in this regard is to check for any acts of illegality, incorrectness or impropriety in the subordinate Court’s decisions. 5. The Applicant herein was charged with the offence of gang rape Contrary to Section 10 of the Sexual offences Act No. 3 of 2006. The offence attracts a minimum sentence of 15 years upon conviction. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/566/eng@2026-01-22 1
page 1 of 2
The Applicant herein was sentenced to a lesser period of 10 years. The sentence was therefore was not incorrect. There was also nothing illegal or inappropriate about it. There are therefore, no valid reason for review. This prayer is unmerited. It is hereby disallowed. 6. On compliance with Section 333 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, a Perusal of the proceedings show that there is no evidence of compliance of the aforesaid Section by the trial court. The Applicant was arrested on 07/06/2024 and sentenced on 19/12/2024. Although he was granted bond, it is apparent he did not take it up. 7. Pursuant to the aforesaid section of the criminal procedure code, the Applicant is entitled to a discount on the sentence for the period between 7-6-2024 to 19.12.2024. Consequently, the lower court sentence is hereby varied to the extent that the Applicant sentence of 10 years is hereby deemed to have taken effect from 7th June, 2024, being the date when the Applicant was arrested. DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT ISIOLO, THIS 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2026. S. CHIRCHIR JUDGE In the Presence of:Roba Katelo- Court Assistant. The Applicant Mr. Manjale for the Respondent. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/566/eng@2026-01-22 2
page 2 of 2