Muchui v Republic (Criminal Revision E169 of 2024) [2026] KEHC 7314 (KLR) (28 May 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 7314 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT MERU CRIMINAL REVISION E169 OF 2024 SM GITHINJI, J MAY 28, 2026 BETWEEN GODFREY MUCHUI ............................................................................... APPLICANT AND REPUBLIC ............................................................................................ RESPONDENT RULING 1. The Applicant herein, one Godfrey Muchui, filed a Chamber Summons dated 17th May, 2024. He reveals on the grounds in support of it, that he was arrested on 16/8/2018 and charged at Meru High Court with the offence of Manslaughter, contrary to Section 202 of the Penal Code. 2. Upon full trial, he was convicted of the offence and sentenced to serve 15 years imprisonment. 3. He prays for review of the sentence downwards, claiming that he’s reformed and is part of prison fellowship. 4. He alleges that he has gained both spiritual and other skills that will enable him be of help to the Community and his family. 5. The said application is pegged on Section 362, 364(2), 42 and 362 of the Criminal Procedure Code. 6. The Respondent opposed the application on the ground that the Court lacks jurisdiction to review a sentence imposed by a Court of concurrent jurisdiction. 7. The legal position in relation to the issue raised, is that review jurisdiction (including sentence revision under Sections 362-364 of the Criminal Procedure Code) is contained to Subordinate Courts, and does not extend to Courts of equal status, as that would amount to an appeal in disguise. 8. The High Court’s Supervisory and revisionary jurisdiction is constitutionally and statutorily limited to Subordinate Court; It has no mandate to review or alter sentence imposed by a Court of concurrent https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/7314/eng@2026-05-28 1
page 1 of 2
jurisdiction, as this would offend Articles 165(3) and (5) of the Constitution of Kenya 2010, and amounts to unlawful assumption of Appellate authority. 9. The bottom line is therefore obvious, that this Court lacks jurisdiction to grant the Applicant’s prayer. The application is therefore dismissed for want of merit. DATED AND DELIVERED AT MERU THIS 28TH DAY OF MAY, 2026. S.M. GITHINJI – JUDGE 28/5/2026 In the presence of:Petitioner present at Chuka G. K. Prison. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/7314/eng@2026-05-28 2
page 2 of 2