Langat v Republic [2022] KEHC 14103 (KLR)

Langat v Republic (Criminal Appeal 2 of 2020) [2022] KEHC 14103 (KLR) (14 October 2022) (Ruling)

Neutral citation: [2022] KEHC 14103 (KLR)

Republic of Kenya

In the High Court at Kericho

Criminal Appeal 2 of 2020

AN Ongeri, J

October 14, 2022

Between

William Kiprono Langat

Appellant

and

Republic

Respondent

Ruling

1. The appellant herein William Kiprono Langat made an oral Application on 22/9/2022 to withdraw his appeal and asked the court to include the period he was in remand in the sentence meted by the trial court.

2. Upon perusing the original record, I find that the accused person was first arraigned before court on October 29, 2018.

3. He was sentenced on November 29, 2019.

4. Section 333 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Codeprovides as follows regarding inclusion of the period an accused has been in custody. “Subject to the provisions of section 38 of the Penal Code(cap. 63) every sentence shall be deemed to commence from, and to include the whole of the day of, the date on which it was pronounced, except where otherwise provided in this Code. Provided that where the person sentenced under subsection (1) has, prior to such sentence, been held in custody, the sentence shall take account of the period spent in custody.”

5. The Court of Appeal in Bethwel Wilson Kibor v Republic (2009), eKLR, held as follows: - “By proviso to section 333(2) of Criminal Procedure Code where a person sentenced has been held in custody prior to such sentence, the sentence shall take account of the period spent in custody.”

6. In Ahamad Abolfathi Mohammed &another v Republic (2018), eKLR, the Court of Appeal stated as follows: - “The second is the failure by the court to take into account in a meaningful way, the period that the appellants had spent in custody as required by section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. By dint of section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, the court was obliged to take into account the period that they had spent in custody before they were sentenced. Although the learned judge stated that he had taken into account the period the appellants had been in custody, he ordered that their sentence shall take effect from the date of their conviction by the trial court. With respect, there is no evidence that the court took into account the period already spent by the appellants in custody.”

7. I find that the oral Application for inclusion of the period the Appellant was in custody is merited and I direct that his sentence of ten years starts to run from October 29, 2018and not October 29, 2019when he was sentenced.

8. His oral Application to withdraw the Appeal is also allowed as prayed.Orders to issue accordingly.

DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED AT KERICHO THIS 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2022. A. N. ONGERIJUDGE