Republic v Nyambura [2022] KEHC 11178 (KLR)

Republic v Nyambura (Criminal Case 51 of 2016) [2022] KEHC 11178 (KLR) (7 June 2022) (Ruling)

Neutral citation: [2022] KEHC 11178 (KLR)

Republic of Kenya

In the High Court at Kiambu

Criminal Case 51 of 2016

MM Kasango, J

June 7, 2022

Between

Republic

Prosecution

and

Samuel Ngige Nyambura

Appellant

Ruling

1. Samuel Ngige Nyambura (Samuel) was charged on 15th June, 2016 with the offence of murder. The particulars of the office were that on 15th May, 2016 at Kiambaa village within Kiambu County Samuel murdered Anthony Mwangi Nyambura (deceased). The deceased was brother of Samuel.

2. Prosecution entered into plea bargain with Samuel and on 18th September, 2017 Samuel pleaded guilty to the lesser offence of manslaughter contrary to Section 202 as read with Section 205 of the Penal Code.

3. By this Court’s Ruling of 14th December, 2017, Samuel was sentenced to serve probation for a period of three years under the supervision of Director of Probation Office, Kiambu County.

4. On 21st October, 2018, Samuel was presented before court for having violated the probation order. The following is what the probation officer informed the court.“The accused (Samuel started off well but has resumed taking drugs. He has therefore become difficult to supervise and the mother is living in fear.”

5. Samuel was brought before court on 5th May, 2022 for the court to put him the allegation of his breach of probation order. This is in keeping with the holding in the case Mulwa Munyalovs.Republic (1978) eKLR, as follows:-“When a defendant is brought before a Court for the breach of a probation order, the breach should be put to him in the very clearest possible way, and he should be asked whether he admits it. He should be told the grounds on which it is said that he has broken the terms of the probation order. If the order has been broken by the commission of another offence, he should be told the Court at which he appeared, the offence with which he was charged and the adjudication of the court. If he admits the matter put to him, the Court can proceed to deal with him. If he denies those matters, however, they must be proved, and he must be asked if he wishes to give evidence (or make a statutory statement) and call witnesses. After all the evidence has been taken, the Court must pronounce whether it finds the breach proved: see R v Devine [1956] 1 WLR 236, 237. ”

6. This is what Samuel stated before court:-“I did not take bhang but I failed to report to probation because I did not have money to go to their offices.I did not have money.The court can sentence me as it likes.I don’t have witnesses to call.”

7. In the light of Samuel’s failure to abide with the requirements of the probation officer and having been reported to have reverted back to taking illegal drugs while on probation and perhaps more importantly, that he threatened to kill his mother as he did to his deceased brother, I am of the view that custodial sentence is appropriate for offence of manslaughter and bearing the above in mind, he is sentenced to 30 years.

Disposition 8. I hereby sentence Samuel Ngige Nyambura to serve 30 years imprisonment for the offence of manslaughter. That sentence will be calculated to start from 1st October, 2018.

RULING DATED AND DELIVERED AT KIAMBU THIS 7TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022. MARY KASANGOJUDGECoram:Court Assistant : MauriceAccused : Samuel Ngige Nyambura : - PresentFor accused : - No AppearanceFor DPP : Mr. KasyokaRuling delivered virtually.MARY KASANGOJUDGE