[2022] KEHC 2706 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case against the accused. The evidence presented by the prosecution witnesses did not link the accused to the murder of the deceased, nor did it provide any direct or circumstantial evidence as to how the deceased met his death. All prosecution...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEHC 2706 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: George Otieno Randere
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kisumu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 29 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Trial / Ruling on Case to Answer
- Outcome
- acquittal
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Prima Facie Case, Acquittal, Burden of Proof
- 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
Republic
Applicant
George Otieno Randere
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial / Ruling on Case to Answer
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution established a prima facie case against the accused to warrant putting him on his defence.
- 2 Whether the evidence on record could sustain a conviction for murder against the accused.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case against the accused. The evidence presented by the prosecution witnesses did not link the accused to the murder of the deceased, nor did it provide any direct or circumstantial evidence as to how the deceased met his death. All prosecution witnesses who testified stated that they did not know how the deceased died, and none implicated the accused. The investigating officer's testimony did not cure this evidentiary gap. Consequently, the court held that even if the accused chose to remain silent, a conviction could not be sustained on the evidence on record. The accused was therefore found to have no case to answer...
Court Disposition
acquittal
Orders
- The accused, George Otieno Randere, is acquitted of the charge of murder and is set at liberty forthwith.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
42 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT KISUMU
HCCRC NO. 29 OF 2019
PROSECUTOR.................................................................................................REPUBLIC
VERSUS
GEORGE OTIENO RANDERE......................................................................ACCUSED
RULING
The accused, GEORGE OTIENO RANDERE, was charged with the offence of Murder contrary to Section 203as read with Section 204of the Penal Code. The particulars of the offence were that the accused jointly with other persons who were not before the Court, murdered FREDRICK OMONDI OKUNYA, on 8th January 2016, at Katuk Village in Nyang’oma Location, Muhoroni Sub-County.
1. The prosecution has called 4 witnesses.
2. PW1, PATRICK ONYANGO ODONGO, testified that on 8th January 2016 he was walking from Chemelil Round-about, heading to his home at Katuk.
3. After alighting from the vehicle, PW1heard screams which appeared to come from the home of Thomas Ng’ola Okello. However, PW1did not go to the said home.
4. He heard someone shouting loudly, saying;
“You are killing me because of my wife;
Just kill me.”
5. PW1testified that he did not recognize the person who had shouted out those words.
6. He also added that he did not find out what was happening.
7. On the next day he learnt that someone called Omondi had been found dead, by the roadside.
8. PW1told the Court that he did not know what killed Omondi.
9. PW2, BERNARD OGADA OKOTH, was the Assistant Chief of Sidho Sub-location, Nyang’oma Location.
10. At about 7. 30a.m on 9th January 2016, he received information that someone was lying on the road, at the junction of the Chemelil- Awasi Road.
11. Upon reaching the scene, PW2notified police officers at the Chemelil Police Post, about the situation. He also notified the Chief.
12. Before the police officers and the CIDremoved the body from the scene, they tasked PW2to find out who might have snatched the wife of the deceased, on the previous day.
13. It was the evidence of PW2that the deceased had been beaten-up by unknown people.
14. As regards the wife of the deceased, PW2found out that she had been taken to the home of NICHOLAS OTIENO ONGOLA.
15. PW3,CHRISTOPHER OKOTH OKELLO, testified that on 8th January 2016 he had the noise of some people who were fighting outside his homestead.
16. The fighting was happening about 100 metres away from his homestead. However, PW3remained within his homestead.
17. His evidence was that he never got to know the persons who had been fighting.
18. PW4, PC JAPHETH KIMUTAI, was the Investigating Officer in this case. He visited the scene of crime, where he found the body of the deceased. The body had an injury on the head; on the right-hand elbow and some bruises on the chest and the back.
19. According to PW4, there were 4 witnesses who recorded statements, as they knew how the deceased was killed.
20. The said 4 witnesses were named as;
a. Bernard Ogada Okoth;
b. Marikus Golo Ondoro;
c. Christopher Okoth Okeke; and
d. Patrick Onyango Odongo.
21. Three of the named witnesses testified before this Court. However, all of them told the Court that they did not know how the deceased met his death.
22. Having evaluated all the evidence tendered by the prosecution I have come to the conclusion that the prosecution has failed to establish a prima facie case against the accused, which would warrant him being put to his defence.
23. I find that even if the accused decided to say nothing at all, in answer to the evidence which has been presented in Court, a conviction cannot arise from the evidence on record.
24. Therefore, I find that the accused has no case to answer. He is hereby acquitted.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT KISUMU THIS 1ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022
FRED A. OCHIENG
JUDGE