REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA MISC. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. E121 OF 2025 MRAMBA ZUMA KUMBO BENDARO.……………………..……………………….…… APPLICANT VERSUS REPUBLIC…………………………………………………………..…………..….… RESPONDENT RULING 1. The Applicant was charged with the offence of murder contrary to Section 203 of the Penal Code as read together with Section 204 of the Penal Code. He was convicted and sentenced to serve a custodial sentence of 20 years imprisonment. This court also took into account the time that he had spent in custody before he was sentenced. He has now moved this court through an undated application seeking a review of the sentence on the grounds that he has been incarcerated for a considerable period of seven (7) years from the date of his arrest and that he has improved himself. He also contends that due to his absence, his family has developed post-traumatic stress syndrome since he was the sole bread winner. 2. The court has examined the record of the trial court as well as the judgment rendered on 29 February 2024 as well as the sentencing dated 30 July 2024. The Applicant invites this court to exercise revision powers in respect of the sentence. The High Court’s powers of revision are exercised pursuant to Sections 362 and 364 of the Criminal Procedure Code. This power is exercised in respect of subordinate courts and not decisions of courts of Page 1 of 2
page 1 of 2
concurrent jurisdiction. This court does not have jurisdiction to review its own sentences. That is the role of the Court of Appeal. 3. Besides, even if this court would exercise its powers under the Probation of Offenders Act to commute a sentence it has passed, the circumstances of this case do not warrant exercise of such powers. The nature of the offence committed and the time spent in custody vis-à-vis the time remaining does not point to a conclusion that the objectives of punishment have been achieved. This is a matter that can be revisited at a future date and in consideration of a sentence review report from a probation officer – which was not availed in this case. 4. Consequently, the application lacks merit and is hereby dismissed. RULING DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY THIS 2ND DAY OF JULY 2026 ________________ NABIL M. ORINA JUDGE IN THE PRESENCE OF: THE APPLICANT HAMZA – COURT ASSISTANT Page 2 of 2
page 2 of 2