Republic v Keter [2023] KEHC 25329 (KLR)

Republic v Keter (Criminal Case 34 of 2018) [2023] KEHC 25329 (KLR) (14 November 2023) (Sentence)

Neutral citation: [2023] KEHC 25329 (KLR)

Republic of Kenya

In the High Court at Kericho

Criminal Case 34 of 2018

JK Sergon, J

November 14, 2023

Between

Republic

Prosecutor

and

Julius Kiprotich Keter

Accused

Sentence

1. Julius Kiprotich Keter the Accused herein, was charged and convicted with the offence of murder contrary to section 203 as read with section 204 of the Penal Code Cap 63 Laws of Kenya. The particulars of the offence are that on 12th day of November, 2018 at about 2200 Hours at Kipsomon Village in Kaplelartet Location, Sigowet Soin Sub-County within Kericho County, the Accused murdered Vincent Cheruiyot Rono.

2. Upon convicting the accused for the aforesaid offence, this court directed the county Probation Officer to file a pre-sentence Report and also invited the Accused to make submissions in mitigation to guide the Court in determining the appropriate sentence to be meted out.

3. Mr. Koko Learned Counsel for the Accused, informed this court that the accused was apprehended in 2018 and has been in custody to date, he therefore urged the court to take into account the time spent in custody. The Learned Counsel submitted that the accused is remorseful for commission of the offence and was committed to reintegrating back into society as a law abiding citizen. The Learned Counsel stated that the accused undertook biblical courses and attained certification while in custody. He therefore urged the court to consider the principles of sentencing, while laying emphasis on the rehabilitative aspect as opposed to the punitive and /or deterrent aspect.

4. Mr. Musyoki Learned Assistant Director of Public Prosecutions submitted that the accused ought to be treated as first offender as he has no prior records.

5. This court also called for a pre-sentence report. I have considered the pre-sentencing report prepared and filed by the Kericho County – Probation Officer. In the aforesaid report it is noted that the accused is in a marital union blessed with three issues who need his care and attention and engages in farming activities as his basic source of livelihood. It is noted that the offender has no previous criminal record, however, he used to consume alcohol and abuse drugs (bhang).

6. The offender was remorseful and admitted that on the material day, he acted in the heat of the moment after he discovered that the deceased was having an affair with his wife.

7. The family of the offender regretted the circumstances under which the offender cut short the life of the deceased. The family had made efforts to reconcile with the deceased’s family, reconciliation was done with the assistance of village representatives and/or elders. The family members urged the court to consider placing the accused on a non-custodial sentence in order for him to fend for his family and were receptive and willing to assist him in the reintegration process and further rehabilitation.

8. In the presentence report it was noted that the victim’s family and the offender’s family had reconciled and were awaiting to complete the cleansing rituals in the event that the offender is released as the cleansing ceremony requires the presence of the accused.

9. The local administration stated that the community was ready to receive and assist the accused to reintegrate and settle into the community because reconciliation had been concluded between the two families. The area chief welcomed the idea of a probation sentence so that the offender could be assisted with socio-economic empowerment and issues to do with anger management and abuse of alcohol

10. The county probation officer noted the above sentiments and the fact that the community and local administration were receptive to a non-custodial sentence and therefore recommended that the court considers the offender for a probation sentence inorder to allow the probation office to offer guidance and counseling with a view towards positive behavior change.

11. I have considered that the accused has been in custody for a period of four (4) years, eleven (11) months since his arrest and subsequent arraignment in court on 20th November, 2018.

12. Having considered the circumstances of the offence, submissions in mitigation and having further considered the contents of the pre-sentence report which is favourable, it is apparent that in the circumstances of this case that a non-custodial sentence is appropriate. I am therefore inclined to adopt the recommendation of the probation officer.

13. Consequently, I hereby sentence the Accused namely: Julius Kiprotich Keter to serve on a probation order for a period of 3 Years under the Supervision of the Kericho County Probation Officer.

DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT KERICHO THIS 14TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023……………J. K. SERGONJUDGEIn the presence of:C/Assistant – RutohProbation Officer – Mr. MusyokiConvict – Present in PersonKoko for the Accused