1.The appellant through of appeal filed on 9/3/2021 sought that his sentence be set aside.
2.The appellant through amended grounds of appeal filed on April 4, 2022 sought that his mitigation at the trial court be considered as the sentence was harsh & excessive & beyond the maximum provide by the relevant law.
3.The appellant was charged with the offence of grievous harm contrary to section 234 of Penal Code.
4.Particulars are that the appellant Mohamed Alfan Randani on the July 29, 2020 at around 11.30hours at Golini Location Matuga Sub-county Kwale County within Coast Region unlawfully did grievous harm to Said Ramathan.
5.The appellant pleaded guilty to the charge & was convicted & sentenced to serve 25 years imprisonment.
6.During trial the Magistrate said:-
7.This court called for Victim Impact Statement and Sentence Review Report both of which was filed on September 26, 2022 and the Probation Officer Anthony M Piri found out that the offence may have been committed due to appellants ill mental condition and although the prisons authority have stated that his mental health condition has significantly improved the community & administration where he comes from have reservations against the appellant’s immediate release as they are doubtful and skeptical as to whether he has fully medically recovered.
8.The appellant’s family members however plead that he be granted non-custodial sentence.
9.On the other hand the victim is said to be frail as a result of injuries inflicted on him by the appellant who is his maternal uncle. The victim is unable to engage in rigorous & strenuous work due to the injuries and has been dependant on his elder brother, mother & other well-wishers. The victim’s family have vowed to forgive the appellant if the appellant and his family members settle the pending medical bills & initiate some sort of compensation.
10.Having considered the social inquiry report, I do find that the appellants ground of appeal that he should have his sentence substituted with non-custodial cannot succeed. However, I do find that the sentence of 25 years was harsh & excessive considering that he pleaded guilty in the 1s instance and did not waste the courts time.
11.In that regard this court is of the view that a sentence of 10 years would have been appropriate considering sentences in other more severe offences. This court orders that the appellant continues with medication in respect to mental illness while still in custody. The substituted sentence of 10 years should run from 3/08/2020.