africa.lawBeta
SearchAsk AICollectionsJudgesCompareMemo
africa.law

Free access to African legal information. Legislation, case law, and regulatory documents from across the continent.

Resources

  • Legislation
  • Gazettes
  • Jurisdictions

Developers

  • API Documentation
  • Bulk Downloads
  • Data Sources
  • GitHub

Company

  • About
  • Contact
  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy Policy

Jurisdictions

  • Ghana
  • Kenya
  • Nigeria
  • South Africa
  • Tanzania
  • Uganda

© 2026 africa.law by Bhala. Open legal information for Africa.

Aggregating legal information from official government publications and public legal databases across the continent.

Back to search
Case Law[2026] KEHC 1523Kenya

Maarufu v Republic (Miscellaneous Application E206 of 2023) [2026] KEHC 1523 (KLR) (12 February 2026) (Ruling)

High Court of Kenya

Judgment

REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA COUNTY COURT NAME: MOMBASA HIGH COURT CASE NUMBER: HCCRMISCAPPL/E206/2023 SAID JUMA MAARUFU VS THE REPUBLIC RULING REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT MOMBASA MISC APPLICATION NO. E206 OF 2023 SAIDI JUMA MAARUFU...............................................................................................APPLICANT VERSUS REPUBLIC...........................................................................................................................RESPONDENT RULING (Revision of sentence in Mombasa Magistrate Criminal Case NO. 101 OF 2020 delivered on 4 September 2023) th The undated Notice of Motion prepared by the Applicant is brought under Section 333 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code . The Applicant prays that the period spent in remand custody during his trial be computed into the seven years’ sentence awarded by the trial court. The Applicant was charged, convicted and sentenced to 7 years’ imprisonment for the offence of Rape contrary to Section 3 (1) (a) (b) as read with sub-section 3 of the Sexual Offences Act no. 3 of 2006. In his affidavit in support of the application, the applicant claims to have been in remand custody from 12 August 2020 to 4 September 2023 when the sentence was th th passed. He is aggrieved that the period spent in remand was not considered into the computation of the sentence awarded by the trial court. I have considered the application and the affidavit in support of the same. The Respondent has not opposed it nor submitted on the application, as at the time of making this determination. The issue for consideration is whether the application has merit and what orders this court should make. The Judiciary of Kenya 1/ Doc IDENTITY: 28160842572397418776323244607 Tracking 3 Number:OOXNY82026 This court is mandated to consider the period the Accused person spent in remand while his trial was on going in line with Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code Cap 75 (Laws of Kenya) . The said Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code provides that: - “Subject to the provisions of section 38 of the Penal Code (cap 63) every sentence shall be deemed to commence from, and to include the whole of the day of, the date on which it was pronounced, except where otherwise provided in this Code Provided that where the person sentenced under subsection (1) has, prior to such sentence, been held in custody, the sentence shall take account of the period spent in custody” Further, Clauses 7.10 and 7.11 of the Judiciary Sentencing Policy Guidelines provide that: - “The proviso to section 333 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code obligates the court to take into account the time already served in custody if the convicted person had been in custody during the trial. Failure to do so impacts on the overall period of detention which may result in an excessive punishment that is not proportional to the offence committed. In determining the period of imprisonment that should be served by an offender, the court must take into account the period in which the offender was held in custody during the trial.” The requirement under Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code was restated by the Court of Appeal in Ahamad Abolfathi Mohammed & Another vs Republic [2018] eKLR. Instantly I have perused the trial court’s record. The applicant was first arraigned in court on 12 August 2020. Indeed, the applicant could not raise the bond terms and he th remained in custody throughout his trial. The application is merited. The sentence to run from 12 August 2020 when the Applicant was first arraigned in court. th DELIVERED, DATED and SIGNED at MOMBASA on this 12 DAY OF FEBRUARY TH 2026. Ruling delivered through Microsoft Teams Online Platform. WENDY KAGENDO MICHENI JUDGE In the presence of;- THE APPLICANT PRESENT IN PERSON MR SIRIMA FOR THE STATE BEBORA COURT ASSISTANT SIGNED BY/FOR: HON. LADY JUSTICE WENDY MICHENI The Judiciary of Kenya 2/ Doc IDENTITY: 28160842572397418776323244607 Tracking 3 Number:OOXNY82026 THE JUDICIARY OF KENYA. MOMBASA HIGH COURT HIGH COURT CRIMINAL DATE: 2026-02-12 12:56:05

Similar Cases

Republic v Ramadhan Mwinyi Mohammed (Criminal Case E004 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 1518 (KLR) (12 February 2026) (Ruling)
[2026] KEHC 1518High Court of Kenya79% similar
Republic v Yaa & 2 others (Criminal Case E014 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 1521 (KLR) (12 February 2026) (Ruling)
[2026] KEHC 1521High Court of Kenya77% similar
Republic v Ogina (Criminal Case E012 of 2020) [2026] KEHC 1555 (KLR) (12 February 2026) (Sentence)
[2026] KEHC 1555High Court of Kenya77% similar
Republic v Otieno (Criminal Case E008 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 1547 (KLR) (12 February 2026) (Ruling)
[2026] KEHC 1547High Court of Kenya77% similar
Republic v County Secretary, County Government of Meru & 4 others; Kaburu t/a Mwirigi Kaburu & Co. Advocates (Ex parte Applicant) (Environment and Land Case Judicial Review Application E013 of 2024) [2026] KEELC 716 (KLR) (10 February 2026) (Ruling)
[2026] KEELC 716Employment and Labour Court of Kenya73% similar

Discussion