Case ID:175313

Republic v Gerevasio Mwenda & 2 others [2021] eKLR

Case Metadata

Case Number:

Criminal Case 32 of 2017

Parties:

Republic v Gerevasio Mwenda, Daniel Mugambi & Geoffrey Mwiti

Date Delivered:

11 Mar 2021

Case Class:

Criminal

Court:

High Court at Meru

Case Action:

Sentence

Judge(s):

Edward Muthoga Muriithi

Citation:

Republic v Gerevasio Mwenda & 2 others [2021] eKLR

Advocates:

Mr. Igweta, Advocate for the Accused.

Ms. Nandwa, Prosecution Counsel for the Prosecution

Court Division:

Criminal

County:

Meru

Advocates:

Mr. Igweta, Advocate for the Accused.

Ms. Nandwa, Prosecution Counsel for the Prosecution

History Advocates:

Both Parties Represented

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 MERU

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 32 OF 2017

REPUBLIC………………………………..………..………….PROSECUTOR

VERSUS

GEREVASIO MWENDA……………...…………………......…1

st

ACCUSED

DANIEL MUGAMBI ALIAS KIRU…………….…….……..2

ND

ACCUSED

GEOFFREY MWITI…………………..…………....……….. 3

RD

ACCUSED

SENTENCE

The crime

[1] The two offenders before the court, that is the 1

st

accused

Gerevasio Mwenda

and the 2

nd

accused

Daniel Mugambi alias Kiru

were found guilty of the offence of murder contrary to section 203 as read with 204 of the Penal Code by the Judgment of the Court (Mabeya, J.) on 10

th

December 2020. The third accused,

Geoffrey Mwiti,

was acquitted

[2] Another accused

John Muthinja M’Ibere

absconded and the trial of the three accused persons proceeded in his absence.

[3] On the facts, the court found that the two accused, the 1

st

and 2

nd

accused had strangled the deceased as the cause of death was established by medical evidence as asphyxia secondary to strangulation.

Sentencing proceedings

[4] At the sentencing proceedings, Ms. Nandwa, Prosecution Counsel for the DPP urged a deterrent custodial sentence stating that the deceased’s family were still grieving his loss and the two accused persons had not reached out to he family for any forgiveness although they could be treated as first offenders.

[5] Mr. Igweta, Counsel for the accused in mitigation for the offenders urged the court grants custodial sentences for the two accused who were young persons, respectively aged 32 and 36 with minor children, and the 2

nd

accused had been in custody for 4 years since April 2017 during which time he had attained some certificates for several courses in Christian/Bible studies.

The Sentence

[6] What sentence is appropriate for first offender, youthful offenders in their thirties with young families found guilty of a charge of murder c/s 203 as read with 204 of the Penal Code taking into account the principles of discretionary sentencing established by the Supreme Court’s direction

Karioko Muruatetu & Anor. v. R

{2017] eKLR and the reform and rehabilitation objectives of imprisonment under Article 10 (3) of the

UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966

?

[7] I have recently held in KBT HCCRC NO. 50 of 2017,

R. v. Simon Evans Kandie

in very like circumstances of youthful offender that a composite sentence for the deterrent of the offender (and others of like mind) and his rehabilitation back into society on completion of sentence was appropriate as follows:

“

A dual purpose of deterrence and reformation of the offender may be achie

ve

d by a sufficiently severe sentence serving to

deter

both potential offenders and repeat offence by the offender

,

and also

reform

the offender into a person capable of lawful

,

productive

living in society among other members of his community.

”

[8] In that case, I passed a sentence of imprisonment for thirty (30) years, which allows the offender to get back to the society a reformed person, subject to remission for good conduct, after 20 years in prison.

Orders

[9] Accordingly, for the reasons set out above, the Court passes a sentence of

imprisonment for thirty (30) years

on each accused for the offence of murder contrary to section 203 as read with 204 of the Penal Code. The sentence for the 1

st

accused

GEREVASIO MWENDA

whose was out on bond during the trial shall commence from the date of this sentence and the sentence for the 2

nd

accused

DANIEL MUGAMBI ALIAS KIRU

who was in custody during his trial shall commence on

19

th

April 2017,

the date of his arraignment and remand to await his trial

,

pursuant to section 333 (2) Proviso of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Order accordingly.

DATED AND DELIVERED THIS 11

TH

DAY OF MARCH 2021.

EDWARD M. MURIITHI

JUDGE

Appearances:

Mr. Igweta, Advocate for the Accused.

Ms. Nandwa, Prosecution Counsel for the Prosecution.