The Court of Appeal has overturned the High Court decision that upheld the sentencing of Sirisia Member of Parliament John Waluke to 67 years in prison with an option of a Ksh.1 billion fine over a maize importation scam.

The Appellate court, in its ruling on Friday, stated that the High Court fell short of providing proper context of the evidence before it.

In the majority judgement, Justices Asike Makhanda and Patrick Kiage said the High Court failed in proper analysis of evidence, leading to the wrong conclusion.

The Appellate court said High Court Judge Esther Maina, in framing the issues for determination, erred in upholding the sentencing of Waluke and his co-accused Grace Wakhungu, handed down by Magistrate Elizabeth Juma in 2020.

It stated that the High Court, in upholding the sentencing, fell short of proper analysis and contextualization of the evidence before it, qualifying her determination as flippant and perfunctory.

“In framing the issues for determination, it fell short of proper analysis and contextualization of the evidence. The fresh analysis was not based on the particular elements of the offences charged and was flippant, or perfunctory, to say the least,” ruled the Appellate court.

Further, the Court of Appeal said a mere concentration on the invoice which was the first charge, upon which Waluke was found guilty of forgery to acquire public funds, was a wrong approach by the High Court.

“If at all, the learned Judge merely concentrated on the invoice which was the basis of the first charge and which according to it formed the circumstances of all other charges as per the wording of the Judge. To our minds, this was a wrong approach,” added the ruling.

In the majority judgement, the Court of Appeal ruled the High Court did not subject other charges that flowed out of the first charge to independent proof, despite having different ingredients and actors that required differentiation from the first charge.

It also noted that, failing to analyze the evidence on record, Judge Esther Maina, made a conflated and conglomerate determination, stating that had the Judge analyzed the evidence on record, she would have come to a different conclusion, as to the criminal culpability of the appellants.

“We find this conflated and conglomerate conclusion too wide as the facts were different, based on each appellant. This underlines a failure to subject the evidence to fresh scrutiny. We are satisfied that had the Judge analyzed the evidence on record properly, she would have come to a different conclusion as to the criminal culpability of the appellants,” the court ruled.

In its final orders, the Appellate court ruled that the appellants made a case that warranted their appeal, setting aside the sentences that were handed in June 2020, and setting free Waluke and Wakhungu.

“We are satisfied that the appellants have made a case to warrant us to allow the appeal. The appeal is accordingly allowed, and the convictions and sentences imposed on the appellants are set aside. The appellants shall forthwith be set at liberty unless otherwise lawfully held,” added the ruling..

Waluke was found guilty of fraud and illegal acquisition of more than Ksh.300million in 2020, and sentenced to 67 years in prison, with an option of paying a Ksh.1billion fine.

He was out on a Ksh.10million cash bail, alongside his co-accused and business partner Grace Wakhungu, who was also released on Ksh.20million cash bail after they filed their appeal following the sentencing.