Court dismisses bid to review Jackson Kihara Gachagua’s 20-year jail term

The High Court has dismissed an application by convicted robber Jackson Kihara seeking a review of his 20-year jail term for robbery with violence, finding that he failed to present any legal grounds warranting interference with the sentence.

In a judgment delivered at the High Court, Justice Alexander Muteti ruled that Kihara's application lacked merit and upheld the sentence imposed by the trial court.

"The application before this court does not disclose any sufficient basis for review of the sentence imposed," Justice Muteti held, adding that the punishment meted out was lawful and appropriate in the circumstances of the case.

Kihara had moved to the High Court seeking a reduction or review of the sentence, arguing that he had reformed while in prison and deserved a second chance. He also cited personal circumstances in support of his plea for leniency.

However, the judge found that none of the issues raised justified the court's intervention.

Kihara had claimed to be the late Nyeri Governor Nderitu Gachagua's son.

"The applicant has not demonstrated any error, illegality or exceptional circumstances that would warrant this court's interference with the sentence," the judge stated.

The ruling marks the latest chapter in a case that attracted public attention after Kihara at one point claimed to be a son of the late Nyeri Governor Nderitu Gachagua, the elder brother of former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua.

The claim surfaced during previous court proceedings and generated widespread public interest. However, the issue was never central to the criminal case and did not affect the determination of his conviction or sentence.

Kihara was convicted of robbery with violence, one of the most serious offences under Kenyan law. The offence attracts severe penalties because it involves the use or threat of violence during the commission of a robbery.

Following his conviction, the trial court sentenced him to 20 years in prison. Dissatisfied with the punishment, he later petitioned the High Court seeking a review, maintaining that the sentence was excessive and that he had undergone rehabilitation while serving his term.

But Justice Muteti held that rehabilitation alone could not be a basis for altering a lawful sentence where no legal error had been demonstrated.

"The court must balance the interests of the offender with the need for justice, deterrence and protection of the public," the judge observed.

With the dismissal of the application, Kihara will continue serving the 20-year sentence imposed for the robbery with violence conviction unless a higher court intervenes.