Case ID:175285

Jeremiah Sawe Marita v Republic [2021] eKLR

Case Metadata

Case Number:

Miscellaneous Criminal Petition Application 8 of 2019

Parties:

Jeremiah Sawe Marita v Republic

Date Delivered:

19 May 2021

Case Class:

Criminal

Court:

High Court at Narok

Case Action:

Ruling

Judge(s):

Francis Gikonyo

Citation:

Jeremiah Sawe Marita v Republic [2021] eKLR

Court Division:

Criminal

County:

Narok

Disclaimer:

The information contained in the above segment is not part of the judicial opinion delivered by the Court. The metadata has been prepared by Kenya Law as a guide in understanding the subject of the judicial opinion. Kenya Law makes no warranties as to the comprehensiveness or accuracy of the information

REPUBLIC OF KENYA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAROK

MISC CRIMINAL PETITION APPLICATION NO. 8 OF 2019

(CORAM:

F.M.

GIKONYO J.)

(Revision from Original Conviction/Sentence in Criminal Case No. 1898 Of 2014 Of the Chief Magistrate’s

Court at Narok and HCCRA 21 of 2015 at Narok)

JEREMIAH SAWE MARITA......PETITIONER

-versus-

REPUBLIC..................................RESPONDENT

RULING

Introduction

[1] Before me is an undated application filed on 17

th

July 2019 seeking for orders of a rehearing and resentencing pursuant to the Supreme Court decision in the matter of

Francis Karioko Muruatetu & Another –vs- Republic [2017] eKLR

and the decision in

William Okungu Kittiny Vs Republic [2018] eKLR

.

[2] The applicant was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment in respect of the offence of defilement contrary to section 8(1) (2) of Sexual Offences Act No. 3 of 2006. He filed appeal;

Narok HCCRA 21 of 2015

which appeal was dismissed.

[3] When this application came before Bwonwong’a J. on 28/01/2020, the judge made an order that the applicant’s application be remitted to CM’s court for resentencing and it be mentioned on 18/02/2020 before the CM’s court.

Petitioner’s submission

[4] The Petitioner argued that he only pleads for re-sentencing. He insists that he has not been resentenced.

Prosecution’s submission

[5] Ms. Koina, prosecuting counsel for the Respondent opposed the application. She argued that the High Court has pronounced itself. Therefore, this court does not have jurisdiction to determine the petition. She opined that the applicant should seek redress in an appeal to the Court of Appeal. She urged the court to dismiss the application.

ANALYSIS AND

DETERMINATION

[6] The applicant sought re-sentencing on the basis of Muruatetu decisional law. However, Bwonwong’a J. on 28

th

January, 2020 ordered: -

Appellant’s application remitted to CM’s court for re-sentencing.

[7] Although the court did not give any reason or the basis for the order, such order is not unprecedented given the procedural spin brought about by Muruatetu decision. From the record, there is no order setting aside the life sentence so as to give way to re-sentencing. In the circumstances, it is only appropriate that I give appropriate directions on the petition for resentencing after hearing the parties so as to avert apparent muddle in the matter. It is so ordered.

DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT NAROK THROUGH MICROSOFT TEAMS ONLINE APPLICATION THIS 19TH DAY OF MAY 2021

--------------------------------

F. M. GIKONYO

JUDGE

In the presence of:

1.

The applicant

2.

Ms. Torosi for the Republic

3.

Mr. Kasaso CA

--------------------------------

F. M. GIKONYO

JUDGE