REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT HOMABAY MISC. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. E017 OF 2026 PETER MUMBO NANGA...………………….……..……..…..…………....…….…… APPLICANT VERSUS REPUBLIC…………………………………………………………..........…. ………..RESPONDENT RULING 1. Before the Court is the Applicant's Notice of Motion dated 27 th February 2026 seeking a reduction of his sentence. The application is supported by the Applicant's affidavit sworn on the same date, in which he deposes that he is the sole breadwinner of his family and that, as a result of his incarceration, his children have dropped out of school and are at risk of becoming destitute. He further avers that he is a first offender who is deeply remorseful and repentant for the events that led to the death of the deceased, who was his wife, and that he has since undergone rehabilitation while in prison. 2. In support of his reformation, he states that he has obtained a Diploma in Biblical Studies while in prison and has maintained a clean disciplinary record throughout his incarceration. 3. At the hearing of the application, the Applicant informed the Court that although he had initially lodged an appeal before the Court of Appeal in Criminal Appeal No. E027 of 2024, he subsequently withdrew the appeal and instead filed Criminal Revision No. E008 of 2025 before the High Court. He stated that in the said revision, the Court granted him the benefit conferred under Section 333(2) 1
page 1 of 3
of the Criminal Procedure Code. This position was confirmed by learned counsel for the Respondent, Ms. Oduor. 4. The record shows that the Applicant was charged with the offence of murder contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code in High Court Criminal Case No. 8 of 2018. Upon conclusion of the trial, he was acquitted of the charge of murder but convicted of the lesser offence of manslaughter. Consequently, on 31st July 2023, he was sentenced to serve a fifteen (15) years' imprisonment term. 5. The Court has perused the record and confirmed that the Applicant was indeed granted the benefit of Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code in High Court Criminal Revision No. E008 of 2025. By orders issued on 21 st July 2025, the Court directed that the nineteen (19) days the Applicant spent in custody between 19th February 2018 and 7th March 2018 be taken into account in computing his sentence. The issue relating to the application of Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code has therefore been conclusively determined and cannot be reopened through the present application. 6. The Court has considered the Applicant's plea for a reduction of sentence in light of his alleged rehabilitation, remorse and personal circumstances. While the Court commends the Applicant for the positive strides he has made during his incarceration, including undertaking biblical studies and maintaining good prison discipline, those factors, without more, do not constitute sufficient grounds for interfering with a lawful sentence. 2
page 2 of 3
7. The Applicant was convicted of the offence of manslaughter, a grave offence involving the unlawful loss of human life. Sentencing in such cases must strike a balance between the interests of the offender, the rights of the victim, the expectations of society, and the objectives of criminal justice, including punishment, deterrence, rehabilitation and denunciation. 8. The record shows that the Applicant has served only about three (3) years of the fifteen (15) year custodial sentence imposed upon him, leaving a substantial portion of the sentence unserved. In view of the seriousness of the offence and the significant balance of the sentence remaining, the Court is not persuaded that this is an appropriate case for reduction of sentence, substitution of the remaining custodial term with a non-custodial sentence, or admission of the Applicant to the prison decongestion initiative. 9. In the result, the Notice of Motion dated 27 th February 2026 is devoid of merit and is hereby dismissed. Dated, signed and delivered at Lodwar this 30th day of July 2026 Patrick J O Otieno Judge 3
page 3 of 3