[2024] KEHC 6166 (KLR)
The court found that, after considering the testimonies of the four prosecution witnesses, the prosecution had established a prima facie case against the accused. The evidence presented was sufficient to require the accused to be placed on his defence, as required by Section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code....
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEHC 6166 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Director of Public Prosecutions; Defendant: Robert Kirimi Kariti
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case E007 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer
- Outcome
- Accused placed on his defence.
- Judges
- TW Cherere
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Burden of Proof, Prima Facie Case, Criminal Procedure
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Director of Public Prosecutions
Applicant
Robert Kirimi Kariti
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the accused to warrant being placed on his defence.
- 2 Whether the evidence adduced meets the threshold for a case to answer under Section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that, after considering the testimonies of the four prosecution witnesses, the prosecution had established a prima facie case against the accused. The evidence presented was sufficient to require the accused to be placed on his defence, as required by Section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The court emphasized that the burden of proof remains on the prosecution and that the threshold at this stage is not proof beyond reasonable doubt but rather whether a reasonable tribunal could convict if the accused offered no explanation. Accordingly, the accused was placed on his defence and informed of his rights under the Constitution.
Court Disposition
Accused placed on his defence.
Orders
- The accused is found to have a case to answer and is placed on his defence.
- The provisions of Section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code and Article 50(2)(i)(j)(k) of the Constitution are explained to the accused in the presence of his advocate.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
Director of Public Prosecutions v Kariti (Criminal Case E007 of 2023) [2024] KEHC 6166 (KLR) (16 May 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 6166 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Meru
Criminal Case E007 of 2023
TW Cherere, J
May 16, 2024
Between
Director of Public Prosecutions
Prosecution
and
Robert Kirimi Kariti
Accused
Ruling
1. Robert Kirimi Kariti (Accused) is charged with the offence of Murder contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code in that he murdered one Owen Kinoti on 20th November, 2022.
2. Accused denied committing the offence and the prosecution managed to call four witness.
3. In determining whether Accused has a case to answer, court takes cognizance of the fact that the legal onus is always on the Prosecution to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and not to prove a case that is merely one in which on full consideration might possible be thought sufficient to sustain a conviction. (See In Ramanlal Trambaklal Bhatt Vs R [1957] E.A 332 at 335).
4. Having considered the testimonies of the four prosecution witnesses, I am satisfied that a prima facie case has been established to warrant Accused to be placed on his defence.
5. The provisions of Section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code and Article 50(2)(i)(j)(k) of the Constitution are hereby explained to the accused person in the presence of his advocate Mr. Ng’entu
DELIVERED AT MERU THIS 16TH DAY OF MAY 2024WAMAE. T. W. CHEREREJUDGEAppearancesCourt Assistants - Kinoti/MuneneAccused - PresentFor the Accused - Mr. Ng’entu AdvocateFor the State - Ms. Rita Rotich (PC 1)