The Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) has secured a conviction and a fifty (50)-year custodial sentence against a 48-year-old Sebby Roy Oyugi for the murder of David Omondi Haya, following a judgment delivered by Justice Joe M. Omido at the Kisumu High Court.
In a judgment delivered on 16th April 2026, the court found Sebby Roy Oyugi guilty of murder contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code.
The accused was subsequently sentenced on 8th June 2026 to serve fifty (50) years’ imprisonment, with credit given for the 1,444 days already spent in custody pending trial.
The case arose from an incident that occurred on 3rd June 2021 at Mamboleo Junction in Kisumu East Sub-County, during which the accused deliberately armed himself with a knife obtained from a nearby mutura vendor, pursued the deceased, who was unarmed and fleeing, and stabbed him once on the upper left side of the back. The stab wound penetrated the chest cavity, damaged the left lung, and caused a massive haemorrhage, resulting in the death of the deceased.
The prosecution led by Mercy Mutheu Muema demonstrated through nine witnesses and forensic evidence that the accused acted with malice aforethought.
Two eyewitnesses testified to having observed the accused arm himself, pursue, and stab the deceased before fleeing the scene on a motorcycle.
DNA analysis conducted by the Government Chemist confirmed that blood stains found on the recovered knife matched the DNA profile of the deceased.
In his judgment, Justice Omido found that the accused uttered threats against the deceased before the attack, deliberately acquired a lethal weapon, pursued a fleeing and unarmed victim, and targeted a vulnerable and vital part of the body.
The court rejected the accused’s defence of intoxication and alleged temporary insanity, holding that voluntary intoxication does not constitute a disease affecting the mind under Section 12 of the Penal Code and that the accused had failed to discharge the burden of proving insanity on a balance of probabilities.
In passing sentences, Justice Omido observed that the attack was deliberate, senseless and demonstrated a complete disregard for the sanctity of human life.
The court noted that the combination of aggravating factors, including the prior threats, the deliberate acquisition of a weapon, the pursuit of the deceased, and the accused’s flight from the scene, substantially outweighed the mitigating circumstances, which included the accused’s status as a first offender, his expression of remorse, and his participation in religious and rehabilitative programmes while in custody.
The court further noted that a non-custodial sentence would be wholly inappropriate given the gravity of the offence and the concerns raised in the pre-sentence report, including allegations that the accused threatened members of the deceased’s family and witnesses during the pendency of the trial.
The fifty-year sentence was imposed to reflect society’s condemnation of the unlawful taking of human life, to serve as a deterrent, and to protect the public while preserving the possibility of eventual reintegration into society.
