[2024] KEHC 4878 (KLR)

[2024] KEHC 4878 (KLR)

Upon consideration of the evidence tendered by the four prosecution witnesses, the court found that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against the accused, Amendeo Kirianki Kimathi, for the offence of murder. The court applied the standard that a prima facie case exists where a reasonable tribunal,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] KEHC 4878 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Director of Public Prosecutions; Defendant: Amendeo Kirianki Kimathi
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Meru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Criminal Case 33 of 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Whether Accused Has a Case to Answer After Close of Prosecution's Case
Outcome
The accused is found to have a case to answer and is called upon to defend himself.
Judges
TW Cherere
Legal Topics
Murder, Prima Facie Case, Burden of Proof, Criminal Procedure
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Murder Prima Facie Case Burden of Proof Criminal Procedure

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Director of Public Prosecutions

Applicant

Amendeo Kirianki Kimathi

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Case / Ruling on Whether Accused Has a Case to Answer After Close of Prosecution's Case

  1. 1 Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the accused to warrant him being put on his defence.
  2. 2 What constitutes a prima facie case in the context of a murder charge under Kenyan law.

Ratio Decidendi

Upon consideration of the evidence tendered by the four prosecution witnesses, the court found that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against the accused, Amendeo Kirianki Kimathi, for the offence of murder. The court applied the standard that a prima facie case exists where a reasonable tribunal, properly directing itself to the law and evidence, could convict if no explanation is offered by the defence. The court was satisfied that the evidence was not a mere scintilla or worthless, but sufficient to require the accused to be put on his defence. Accordingly, the court ruled that the accused must be called upon to defend himself as required by Section 306(2) of the...

Court Disposition

The accused is found to have a case to answer and is called upon to defend himself.

Orders

  • The accused is put on his defence as a prima facie case has been established.
  • 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.