A 48-year-old individual received a 50-year prison sentence for the murder of David Omondi Haya at Mamboleo Junction in Kisumu East Sub-County. The defendant had taken a knife from a nearby mutura vendor and stabbed his unarmed, fleeing victim in the back.
Justice Joe Omido of the Kisumu High Court imposed the sentence on June 8, 2026, after the defendant was found guilty on April 16, 2026.
Sebby Roy Oyugi was convicted of murder under Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code.
The court credited him with 1,444 days he had already served in custody awaiting trial.
The incident took place on June 3, 2021, when Oyugi intentionally armed himself with a knife taken from a mutura vendor, chased the deceased who was unarmed and trying to escape, and stabbed him once on the upper left portion of his back.
The single stab wound pierced the chest cavity, damaged the left lung, and resulted in extensive bleeding that led to the victim’s death.
The prosecution, headed by Mercy Mutheu Muema, constructed its case based on testimonies from nine witnesses and forensic evidence.
Two eyewitnesses testified to observing the defendant arm himself, pursue the victim, and stab him before escaping the scene on a motorcycle.
DNA analysis conducted by the Government Chemist established that blood discovered on the recovered knife matched the victim’s genetic profile.
In his ruling, Justice Omido determined that Oyugi had made threats against the victim prior to the assault, deliberately obtained a deadly weapon, pursued a fleeing and defenseless individual, and targeted a vulnerable and essential area of the body.
The court dismissed the defendant’s claims of intoxication and temporary insanity, stating that voluntary intoxication does not qualify as a mental illness under Section 12 of the Penal Code and that the defendant had not sufficiently demonstrated insanity based on the evidence.
When imposing the sentence, the judge characterized the attack as intentional and meaningless, highlighting it showed a total lack of respect for the value of human life.
The court determined that aggravating factors, including prior threats, the intentional acquisition of a weapon, the pursuit of the victim, and the defendant’s departure from the scene, significantly outweighed mitigating factors such as his status as a first-time offender, his expressions of regret, and his involvement in religious and rehabilitation programs during incarceration.
The court also acknowledged issues highlighted in the pre-sentence report, including allegations that the defendant had intimidated family members of the deceased and witnesses during the trial, rendering a non-custodial sentence completely unsuitable.
The fifty-year sentence was imposed to represent society’s condemnation of the illegal taking of human life, act as a deterrent, safeguard the public, and maintain the possibility of future reintegration into society.