[2017] KEHC 5421 (KLR)
The court held that at the stage of ruling on whether there is a case to answer, the prosecution is only required to establish a prima facie case, not to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. Despite the absence of post mortem reports, the court found that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEHC 5421 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Abdi Samad Mohammed Mohamud alias Abdi Muhumed Mohammed; Defendant: Abdi Ibrahim Haidher alias Agawen
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Garissa
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 7 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer at Close of Prosecution Evidence
- Outcome
- Both accused persons found to have a case to answer and are put on their defence.
- Judges
- GMA Dulu
- Legal Topics
- Murder Charges, Prima Facie Case, Case to Answer, Criminal Procedure, 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
Abdi Samad Mohammed Mohamud alias Abdi Muhumed Mohammed
Defendant
Abdi Ibrahim Haidher alias Agawen
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer at Close of Prosecution Evidence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the accused persons to warrant putting them on their defence.
- 2 Whether death can be proved without production of post mortem reports at this stage.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that at the stage of ruling on whether there is a case to answer, the prosecution is only required to establish a prima facie case, not to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. Despite the absence of post mortem reports, the court found that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against both accused persons. Therefore, both accused were put on their defence in accordance with section 211 of the Criminal Procedure Code Cap 75.
Court Disposition
Both accused persons found to have a case to answer and are put on their defence.
Orders
- Both accused persons are put on their defence under section 211 of the Criminal Procedure Code Cap 75.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
18 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT GARISSA
CRIMINAL CASE NO.7 OF 2013
REPUBLIC
VERSUS
1. ABDI SAMAD MOHAMMED MOHAMUD
alias ABDI MUHUMED MOHAMMED
2. ABDI IBRAHIM HAIDHER alias AGAWEN
RULING
Both accused persons stand charged jointly with murder in three counts.
At the close of the prosecution evidence both defence counsel Mr. Nyaga for 1st accused and Mr. Onono fo 2nd accused made strong submissions that their clients had no case to answer. They urged the court not to put their clients on their defences. The prosecution counsel Mr. Okemwa felt that the accused had a case to answer.
I appreciate that post mortem reports were not produced because the respective doctors were not available. In my view however death can in certain circumstances be proved without production of a post mortem forms or report. Details of such circumstances will be gone into during final judgment when the totality of the evidence will have to be evaluated.
For now however, at this stage of case to answer, the standard of proof is different. The prosecution is merely required to establish a prima facie case. I find that the prosecution has established a prima facie case against each of the two accused persons herein. Each has a case to answer.
I thus put both accused on their defences, and proceed to explain them the three options available to them under section 211 of the Criminal Procedure Code Cap 75.
Dated and delivered at Garissa this 3rd May 2017
GEORGE DULU
JUDGE