[2022] KEHC 2838 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against the accused for the offence of murder. This finding was based on the cumulative effect of the evidence, including the accused's admission to a police officer that he had beaten his wife unconscious, the discovery of the deceased's body...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEHC 2838 (KLR)
- Parties
- Respondent: Republic; Defendant: Alex Mungai Kariuki
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Murang'a
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 7 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer (section 306(2) Criminal Procedure Code)
- Outcome
- accused placed on his defence
- Judges
- K Kimondo
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Prima Facie Case, Circumstantial Evidence, 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
Republic
Respondent
Alex Mungai Kariuki
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer (section 306(2) Criminal Procedure Code)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case to require the accused to be put on his defence for the charge of murder.
- 2 Whether the evidence adduced, including circumstantial evidence, is sufficient at this stage to warrant the accused being called to answer.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against the accused for the offence of murder. This finding was based on the cumulative effect of the evidence, including the accused's admission to a police officer that he had beaten his wife unconscious, the discovery of the deceased's body with head injuries in the accused's house, the presence of a bloodstained axe at the scene, and the post mortem report confirming death due to severe head injury. Applying the legal standard from Bhatt v Republic and R v Kipkering arap Koske, the court held that the evidence was sufficient to require the accused to be put on his defence under section 306(2) of the Criminal...
Court Disposition
accused placed on his defence
Orders
- The accused is placed on his defence under section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
25 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MURANG’A
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 7 OF 2013
REPUBLIC...............................................PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
ALEX MUNGAI KARIUKI.............................ACCUSED
RULING
1. The accused is charged with murder contrary to section 203 as read with section 204 of the Penal Code.
2. The particulars are that on 25th May 2013 at Gitura Village within Muran’ga County, he murderedRoseline Wambui Muthoni.
3. He pleaded notguilty. The prosecution lined up sevenwitnesses.
4. Does the evidence disclose a prima facie case sufficient to place the accused on his defence? Learned counsel for the accused, Mr. Kurauka, filed submissions on 8th December 2021. He opines that the prosecution’s case is built atop weak circumstantial evidence and suspicions. He prayed that the accused be acquitted at this stage. The Republic filed submissions on 6th December 2021. In a synopsis, learned prosecution counsel submitted that on the totality of the evidence, the accused has a case to answer.
5. The deceased was the wife of the accused. According to the father of the accused (PW1), the couple had cohabited for 10 years and had three children. I have paid close attention to the evidence of PW5, Police Sergeant Songok. He said that on the material day at about noon, the accused ran into his office and told him that he “had beaten his wife unconscious” and sought to be accompanied by police officers back to his house.
6. According to the Assistant Chief (PW4), he saw the body of the deceased lying in the accused’s house. Blood was oozing from her head. Next to it was a bloodstained axe with a metal handle.
7. From the post mortem report produced under section 77 of the Evidence Act, the death resulted from cardiopulmonary arrest due to severe head injury.
8. Applying the precedents in Bhatt v Republic [1957] E.A. 332 and R v Kipkering arap Koske & another 16 EACA 135 (1949); and, upon the digest of the evidence of all the sevenwitnesses, I find that the Republic has established a prima facie case against the accused.
9. Accordingly, under the provisions of section 306 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, I place the accused on his defence.
It is so ordered.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT MURANG’A THIS 25TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022.
KANYI KIMONDO
JUDGE
Ruling read in chambers in the presence of:
The accused.
Ms. Mwangi holding brief for Mr. Kurauka for the accused.
Ms. A. Otieno for the Republic.
Ms. Susan Waiganjo, Court Assistant.