[2021] KEHC 1561 (KLR)

[2021] KEHC 1561 (KLR)

The court found that, based on the evidence tendered by the nine prosecution witnesses, a prima facie case had been established against the accused persons. The court emphasized that at this stage, it is not required to determine the credibility or conclusiveness of the evidence, but only whether the evidence is...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KEHC 1561 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Agnes Murochia Kamunya; Defendant: Patrick Kinoti Kamunya; Defendant: Jeremiah Kailikia Kamunya; Defendant: Phineas Kinyua Kaome; Defendant: David Kinyua Mugambi; Defendant: Mary Kanario Kamunya; Defendant: Domiciano Kobia Kitibo
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Meru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Criminal Case 1 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Whether a Prima Facie Case Has Been Established at Close of Prosecution Case
Outcome
Accused persons to be put on their defence.
Judges
TW Cherere
Legal Topics
Murder, Prima Facie Case, Criminal Procedure, Burden of Proof
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Murder Prima Facie Case Criminal Procedure Burden of Proof

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Republic

Applicant

Agnes Murochia Kamunya

Defendant

Patrick Kinoti Kamunya

Defendant

Jeremiah Kailikia Kamunya

Defendant

Phineas Kinyua Kaome

Defendant

David Kinyua Mugambi

Defendant

Mary Kanario Kamunya

Defendant

Domiciano Kobia Kitibo

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Case / Ruling on Whether a Prima Facie Case Has Been Established at Close of Prosecution Case

  1. 1 Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the accused persons to warrant their being put on their defence.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that, based on the evidence tendered by the nine prosecution witnesses, a prima facie case had been established against the accused persons. The court emphasized that at this stage, it is not required to determine the credibility or conclusiveness of the evidence, but only whether the evidence is sufficient to require the accused to be put on their defence. Applying the standard set out in Ramanlal Trambaklal Bhatt vs Rex, the court concluded that the prosecution's case met the threshold for calling upon the accused to defend themselves under Section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Court Disposition

Accused persons to be put on their defence.

Orders

  • The accused persons are called upon to defend themselves as provided under Section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.