Kiptum v Republic (Criminal Revision E439 of 2024) [2024] KEHC 15051 (KLR) (29 November 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation:
[2024] KEHC 15051 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
Criminal Revision E439 of 2024
RN Nyakundi, J
November 29, 2024
Between
Mathew Kipkogei Kiptum
Applicant
and
Republic
Respondent
Ruling
1.The applicant was charged with the offence of assault causing actual bodily harm contrary to section 251 of the Penal code.
2.The applicant pleaded guilty to the offence and was convicted on his own plea of guilty. As a consequence, he was sentenced to one year imprisonment.
3.The applicant has approached this court pursuant to sections 357,362,364 & 382 of the Criminal Procedure Code as construed with Article 50(2) (p) & (q) as conjunctively read with Article 50(6)(a) &(b) of the Constitution.
4.The applicant seeks a sentence review based on the sentence review report on record. The report is positive. According to the report, the applicant has served three months in prison and he has acquired some dairy farming skills. That he takes responsibility of the offence committed and he is remorseful. He has a supportive family that is willing to help him with reintegration in the society.
5.The probation officer recommended that the applicant can be considered to serve a community service order (CSO) for the remaining period of his sentence (5 months) at Chororget primary school under the supervision of the head teacher/teacher.
6.The court in imposing a non-custodial sentence is required to take into account the following factors: Gravity of the offence, Criminal History of the offender, Character of the offender, protection of the community and the offender’s responsibility to third parties.
7.In addition, the Community Service Orders Act makes it possible for courts to issue an order requiring the offender to perform community service. This option is available to court when the offender is convicted of an offence punishable by imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years or imprisonment for a term exceeding three years but for which the court determines that any of that term as would be appropriate be served within the community on unpaid public works.
8.Having gone through the facts of the present case, the circumstances fit the legal framework of the Community Service Act as an alternative sentence to imprisonment. I am of the considered view that the circumstances of this case call for a non-custodial sentence to help the Applicant go through guidance and counselling on managing his anger issues. I believe a non-custodial sentence would be greatly benefit the applicant with proper guidance and counselling. Consequently, the effective measure as recommended by the probation officer is to have the applicant serve a community service order for a period of five months at Chororget Primary School under the supervision of the head teacher/teacher on duty for purposes of guiding him on managing his anger issues. The probation officer has an obligation in ensuring that the applicant undergoes professional counselling to help him manage anger issues. Monthly reports shall be filed in court by the supervisor of the applicant through the probation officer. The essence of it is to achieve the effectiveness of this non-custodial sentence and that any breach of any conditions by the applicant shall attract cancellation of the community service order and have the sentence reverted to custodial sanctions.
9.It is so ordered.
SIGNED, DATE AND DELIVERED AT ELDORET THIS 29TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024..................R. NYAKUNDIJUDGERepresentation:Mr. Mugun for the State