Edung v Republic [2024] KEHC 5670 (KLR)

Edung v Republic (Criminal Revision E057 of 2024) [2024] KEHC 5670 (KLR) (17 May 2024) (Ruling)

Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 5670 (KLR)

Republic of Kenya

In the High Court at Lodwar

Criminal Revision E057 of 2024

RN Nyakundi, J

May 17, 2024

Between

Samuel Ekal Edung

Applicant

and

Republic

Respondent

(Header text from original document REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT LODWAR CRIMINAL REVISION NO. E057 OF 2024 SAMUEL EKAL EDUNG ……...………………………….…………………. APPLICANT VERSUS REPUBLIC ……………………………………………….….....…………... RESPONDENT Edung v Republic (Criminal Revision E057 of 2024) [2024] KEHC 5670 (KLR) (17 May 2024) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 5670 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT LODWAR CRIMINAL REVISION E057 OF 2024 RN NYAKUNDI, J MAY 17, 2024 BETWEEN SAMUEL EKAL EDUNG APPLICANT AND REPUBLIC RESPONDENT RULING (Being Review on Sentence from the Decision in Cr.Case No. E009 of 2022 by Hon. N.Idagwa on 20. 9. 2022)

Ruling

1. The applicant was charged with the offence of killing an animal with intent to steal, contrary to section 289 of the Penal Code.

2. The applicant pleaded guilty to the offence before Hon. N.M. Idagwa on 20th September, 2022 and as a consequence, he was convicted on his own plea of guilty and sentenced to 3 years 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 responsive. It is reported that the applicant is remorseful and pleads for mercy and forgiveness. He is 36 years old and a family man with two wives. The applicant has been recommended for a non-custodial sentence. That he should be placed on a community service Order at DCC’s office in Lokitaung

5. In determining whether to impose a custodial or non-custodial sentence, the court is required to take into account the following factors: -a)Gravity of the offence: - sentence of imprisonment should be avoided for misdemeanour.b)Criminal history of the offender. Taking into account the seriousness of the offences, first offenders should be considered for non-custodial sentence.c)Character of the offender: - non-custodial sentence are best suited for offenders who are already remorseful and receptive to rehabilitative measures.d)Protection of the community: - where the offender is likely to pose a threat to the community.e)Offender’s responsibility to third parties: - where there are people depending on the offender.With regard with this case, it appears that there was more emphasis on deterrence than rehabilitation. The applicant in this case had no previous convictions. He pleaded guilty to the charge which could have contributed to a reduction of sentence. The circumstances in which the crime was committed is undoubtedly such as to render it necessary such as to render to impose a non- custodial sentence. The Fact that the Applicant is relatively young and that she is remorseful is a factor which is favourable to the Applicant that appropriately releasing her to the home based rehabilitation would not be prejudicial to society.

6. Further to the aforementioned, 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.

7. The analysis of the facts in this instant case and the charge in question in my view are a perfect fit under the legal framework of the Community Service Act as an alternative sentence to imprisonment. Consequently, the effective measure as recommended by the probation officer is to have the applicant serve the remainder of his sentence at the DCC’s office in Lokitaung. Monthly reports shall be filed in court by the supervisor of the applicant through the probation officer. The essence of it is 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.

SIGNED, DATE AND DELIVERED AT LODWAR THIS 17TH DAY OF MAY 2024. …………………………………….R. NYAKUNDIJUDGEIn the Presence ofMr. Jonathan K. Bungei for the StateAppellant