Case ID:177936

Mirriam Muringe v Republic [2021] eKLR

Case Metadata

Case Number:

Criminal Case 49 of 2017

Parties:

Mirriam Muringe v Republic

Date Delivered:

30 Jun 2021

Case Class:

Criminal

Court:

High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)

Case Action:

Ruling

Judge(s):

Daniel Ogola Ogembo

Citation:

Mirriam Muringe v Republic [2021] eKLR

Advocates:

Ms. Kimani for the State,

Court Division:

Criminal

County:

Nairobi

Advocates:

Ms. Kimani for the State,

History Advocates:

One party or some parties represented

Case Outcome:

Subject to be placed on probation for 3 years.

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 NAIROBI

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 49 OF 2017

MIRRIAM MURINGE..............................................................ACCUSED

VERSUS

DPP..............................................................................................REPUBLIC

RULING

The offender herein

MIRRIAM MURINGE

had been sentenced by the court to serve a 3-year non-custodial probation sentence. This was on 5.3.2020. She however failed to serve as ordered, but rather, stayed away till 15.6.2021 when she was arrested and brought back to court following execution of warrants of arrest issued by the court.

The offender has given an explanation that the Corona Virus with its restrictions came up immediately she came out of prison and that she was unable to reach out to the probation officers. The probation officer Ms. Kanyangi, was confirmed willingness in taking the subject into the probation programme.

Ms. Kimani, for the state, did not object to this request. The counsel however, made a rider that in case the order placing the subject to probationary terms had a default clause, then the court should enforce the default sentence.

I have considered the sentence proceedings of the court on 5.3.2020. The Honourable Judge did not impose any default clause to the term of probation. Also considered is the willingness of the convict/subject to serve through to probation terms and the probation officer’s own willingness and plea that she be re-admitted to the programme. Also noted is that the subject did not commence the terms as ordered by the court.

I hereby order that the convict/subject herein be placed on probation for 3 years on the same terms as ordered on 5.3.2020. The terms of probation shall run from the date of this order. Orders accordingly

D. O. OGEMBO

JUDGE

30.6.2021.

Court:

Ruling read in court in presence of the convict (Langata Women), Ms. Kimani for the state, and Ms. Kanyangi Probation Officer.

D. O. OGEMBO

JUDGE

30.6.2021.