Martin Oloo Maloba v Director of Public Prosecution & Attorney General [2016] KEHC 223 (KLR)

REPUBLIC OF KENYA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA

AT NAIROBI

JUDICIAL REVIEW

MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO.  333 OF 2015

IN THE MATTER OF: AN APPLICATION  UNDER ARTICLE  165(b) AND  (d) OF THE CONSTITUTION  AND   MATTER OF  EXERCISING   SUPERVISORY  JURISDICTION  OVER CRIMINAL  CASES NUMBER  520 OF  2009, 580  OF  2009 AND  578  OF 2009  IN THE CHIEF  MAGISTRATE  COURT AT  MILIMANI LAW COURTS NAIROBI

BETWEEN

MARTIN OLOO MALOBA …………..............................................………………...APPLICANT

VERSUS

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTION………………………………….1ST RESPONDENT

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL………..............................................………….2ND RESPONDENT

RULING

1. The Petitioner/ applicant in this matter is   self represented.  He filed an application by way of chamber summons undated under certificate of urgency seeking orders:

2. That the  court be pleased  to  grant the appellant  ( sic)  to review  the sentence   in the above mentioned  case numbers  Cr 520/2009 /578/2009  and Cr 580/2009 at Chief Magistrates Court Milimani Republic V Martin Oloo Maloba.

3. The applicant petitioner also  filed a sworn affidavit   and  simultaneous  with the  chamber summons  he also  filed a notice  of  motion dated 17th September  2015   seeking for  interpretation of Sections   12(4) (1)  of the Criminal Procedure  Code, Section  137(1) (2), 333(2)  of the Criminal Procedure  Code and Article  165(3)  (d) (i) (ii)  of the Constitution.

4. The applicant in his submissions seeks for an acquittal.  He  concedes  that he did file   for review of sentences after consolidation, which  was   dismissed  by the Criminal  High Court  Division and  that he does not  understand  why his case   was not  considered   yet there is a similar  matter   wherein Honourable Ngenye  J considered  and  granted  the orders.

5. I have considered the applicant’s applications on record as a whole .This court is not an appellate court when exercising Judicial Review jurisdiction.  Even when exercising jurisdiction as the Constitutional and Human Rights Court, it is not an appellate court.

6. Furthermore, for the court to exercise the powers of judicial review  or as stipulated under Article 47 and 165 (7) of the Constitution to review sentence imposed by a court of competent jurisdiction, it must be shown that the petitioner/applicant has exhausted all the appeal avenues.  In the instant case, the applicant has not filed any appeal to the Court of Appeal   against   refusal to revise his sentence and or to consolidate them.  In the premise, he is barred from seeking   a review of the same from this court.

7. Accordingly, I find that   the applicant’s application lacks merit.  The same is hereby dismissed with no orders   as to costs.

Orders accordingly.

Dated, signed and delivered at Nairobi this 19th day of December, 2016.

R.E. ABURILI

JUDGE

In the presence of Mr Martin Oloo Maloba

Mr Muranga h/b for Mr Kihara for the DPP

CA: Lorna