Republic v Korir [2025] KEHC 3565 (KLR)

Republic v Korir (Criminal Case 23 of 2016) [2025] KEHC 3565 (KLR) (20 March 2025) (Sentence)

Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 3565 (KLR)

Republic of Kenya

In the High Court at Kericho

Criminal Case 23 of 2016

JK Sergon, J

March 20, 2025

Between

Republic

Prosecutor

and

Geoffrey Kiplimo Korir

Accused

Sentence

1. Geoffrey Kiplimo Korir the Accused herein, was charged with with the offence of murder contrary to section 203 as read with section section 204 of the Penal Code Cap 63 Laws of Kenya. The particulars of the offence are that, the accused on the 20th day of June, 2016 at Tabaita Village, Ainamoi Location within Kericho County, murdered Betty Chelangat Korir. However, after the trial the Accused herein was convicted of manslaughter.

2. Upon convicting the accused person 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. Sang, the Learned Counsel for the Accused, submitted that the accused was deeply remorseful for the events that culminated in the demise of the deceased. He submitted that the death of the deceased was as a result of infidelity and constant strife in the marital union between the accused and the deceased. He submitted that the accused had undergone the traditional cleansing rites. The Learned Counsel submitted that the offender is a first offender and therefore urged this court to exercise leniency during sentencing and consider a non-custodial sentence.

4. Mr. Ogutu, the Learned Assistant Director of Public Prosecutions, sought a life sentence.

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 respect of the accused person. In the aforesaid report, it is noted that the offender is married to one Betty Chelangat (the victim) and they have four children of school going children. The offender relies on casual work to eke a living and support his children with school fees and upkeep. The offender experienced marital challenges with his wife.

6. On the material day, he confessed that prior to the awful incident, he found his wife having a love affair with another strange man in a bush, the estranged man took off and upon getting home the offender questioned her and she became abusive, the offender was engulfed in anger and an altercation ensued. The offender was arrested and charged with the instant offence.

7. The offender deeply regrets the offence which culminated in the demise of his wife and alluded that if given another chance, he would have acted differently. The offender was inebriated at the material time of the offence. The offender has resolved to support his children through school. This court having granted him bond afforded him a chance to work and therefore take care of his four children with school fees and upkeep.

8. The family of the victim were privy to the fact that the offender and deceased had marital difficulties. The victim had severally refused to heed to advice to mend her ways. The family of the victim had expressed their forgiveness to the offender having acknowledged the victim’s character and on their own volition reconciled with the offender.

9. The offender has strong ties in the community. The offender is well known to the local administrator, has no history of criminality and is said to relate well with the community which afforded him a peaceful stay while out on bond, the offender did not face any hostility. The community and local administrator were not opposed to a non-custodial sentence.

10. Based on the findings of the social inquiry and assessment, the probation officer noted that on the material day, the offender was engulfed in anger having been provoked by the wife after accommodating her unbecoming social behaviours on several occasions. The probation officer found that the offender was suitable for a non-custodial sentence and likely to benefit from counselling sessions on anger management. The probation officer therefore recommended the offender for placement on a probation order for a period of two years subject to this court’s verdict.

11. This court has considered that the accused person was arrested soon after committing the instant offence, he was arraigned and charged on 13th July, 2016 and remanded. The accused made an application for reasonable bail/bond terms, the accused was granted a bond of kshs. 200,000/= with a surety of similar amount and subsequently released on 17th August, 2016, therefore the Accused was in custody for a period of one (1) month.

12. I have considered the circumstances of the offence, submissions in mitigation and have further considered the contents of the pre-sentence report filed by the county probation officer in respect of the accused person. Consequently, I hereby sentence the Accused namely; Geoffrey Kiplimo Korir to serve 3 years on Probation under the Supervision of the Kericho County Probation Officer.

DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT KERICHO THIS 20TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025………….………………..J. K. SERGONJUDGEIn the presence of:C/Assistant – RutohProsecutor – MasisaConvict – Present in PersonSang for the Accused