Esther Njeri Maina v Republic [2022] KEHC 782 (KLR)
Full Case Text
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NAIROBI
CRIMINALMISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONE257OF 2021
ESTHER NJERI MAINA..........................................................................APPLICANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC..............................................................................................RESPONDENT
RULING
The applicant ESTHER NJERI MAINAhas moved this court by way of an undated chambers summons application. The application, ostensibly brought under section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, seeks that the sentence meted out on her be reviewed to account for the period of 2 years and 9 months that she spent in remand custody pending the determination of her case that the trial court did not give account to this period spent in the sentence.
Ms. Ndombi, for the state, made a short response that the trial court duly considered the period spent in remand custody, and that this application ought to be dismissed.
I have considered the application of the applicant and the response of the prosecution section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code (proviso) states:
“Provided that where the person sentenced under sub-section (1) has prior to such sentence, been held in custody, the sentence shall take account of the period spent in custody.”
I have perused the record of the trial court. The record shows that the sentence proceedings of the court of 16. 7.2018, the learned trial magistrate duly considered the mitigation raised by the applicant. Amongst the factors that the applicant raised in mitigation was the period that the applicant had taken in remand custody awaiting determination of the case. The court having duly considered this factor in passing the sentence, this application brought under section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, lacks in any merit. The same is dismissed.
D. O. OGEMBO
JUDGE
22. 3.2022.
Court:
Ruling read out on-line in presence of the applicant and Ms. Joy for the state.
D. O. OGEMBO
JUDGE
22. 3.2022.