Njagi v Republic (Criminal Revision E122 of 2026) [2026] KEHC 11786 (KLR) (29 July 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 11786 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT KIBERA CRIMINAL REVISION E122 OF 2026 DR KAVEDZA, J JULY 29, 2026 BETWEEN BANCY KABUCI NJAGI ......................................................................... APPLICANT AND REPUBLIC ............................................................................................ RESPONDENT RULING 1. The applicant was charged and convicted for the offence of Stealing by Servant Contrary to Section 281 of the Penal Code. She was sentenced to serve four (4) years imprisonment. 2. The applicant has filed the present application seeking sentence review. She states that she is remorseful for the offence committed, has undergone rehabilitation while serving her sentence, and has made positive progress towards reintegration into society. On that basis, she urges this Court to exercise its revisionary jurisdiction by substituting the custodial sentence with a non-custodial sentence. 3. I have considered the application, the grounds advanced in support thereof, the record of the trial court, and the applicable law. The record demonstrates that, before passing sentence, the trial court took into account the applicant's mitigation, the period she had spent in remand custody, and the fact that she was a first offender. 4. The court further exercised its discretion after considering all the relevant sentencing factors. I find nothing on the record to suggest that the trial court acted on wrong principles, took into account irrelevant considerations, or failed to consider relevant ones. The sentence imposed was lawful, proportionate, and commensurate with the circumstances of the offence. 5. While the Court commends the applicant for her remorse and efforts towards rehabilitation, those factors, standing alone, do not constitute sufficient grounds for the exercise of this Court's revisionary jurisdiction. Revision is concerned with correcting an illegality, impropriety, or material irregularity in the proceedings or sentence. No such error has been demonstrated in the present case. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/11786/eng@2026-07-29 1
page 1 of 2
6. Accordingly, I find no good cause to interfere with the sentence imposed by the trial court. The application lacks merit and is hereby dismissed. Orders accordingly. RULING DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY THIS 29TH DAY OF JULY 2026 ______________ D. KAVEDZA JUDGE In the presence of: Applicant Present Mutuma for the Respondent Karimi for the Karimi Court Assistant. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/11786/eng@2026-07-29 2
page 2 of 2