SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Erick Mutua Kyalo v Republic [2017] KEHC 68 (KLR)

[2017] KEHC 68 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
68
Citation
[2017] KEHC 68 (KLR)
Decided
7 December 2017
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeAppealPostureAppeal from original conviction and sentenceCoramEDWARD M. MURIITHI, KEMEI J.
Holding

The sentences imposed by the trial court will run concurrently.

Facts

The appellant and nine others were charged with various offences arising from an incident where a mob of family members and members of the public descended on the homes of the complainants on diverse dates between February and March 2011, burning and destroying the houses and property on allegations of witchcraft.

Issues

  1. Whether the sentences imposed by the trial court should run concurrently or consecutively.
  2. Whether the appellant's conviction and sentences should be altered to run concurrently.

Reasoning

The offences were committed as part of the same criminal transaction, and the sentences should run concurrently.

Outcome

The sentences imposed by the trial court will run concurrently.

Orders

  • Sentences imposed by the trial court will run concurrently from the date they were imposed on 20th September 2013.

Remedies

  • The appellant will be released from custody unless he is otherwise lawfully held.

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Criminal Procedure Code
  • Penal Code
Cases cited (6)
  • Wanjema v. R (1971) EA 493
  • Ng'ang'a v. R (1981) KLR 530
  • Odero v. R (1984) KLR 621
  • R v Fulabhai Jethabhai & Another (1946) 13 EACA 179
  • Rex v Saidi Nsabuga s/o Juma and another (1941) 8 EACA 81
  • Nathani v R (1965 EA 777)
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case