[2019] KEHC 8127 (KLR)

[2019] KEHC 8127 (KLR)

The court found that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against the accused by presenting evidence that, if believed, would be sufficient to sustain a conviction for murder. The evidence included eyewitness testimony placing the accused with the deceased, the recovery and identification of the murder...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEHC 8127 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Andrew Musaina Kihugwa
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Eldoret
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Criminal Case 80 of 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer After Close of Prosecution Case
Outcome
Accused placed on his defence to answer the charge of murder.
Judges
OA Sewe
Legal Topics
Murder, Prima Facie Case, Malice Aforethought, Unlawful Act, Burden of Proof
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Murder Prima Facie Case Malice Aforethought Unlawful Act 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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Republic

Applicant

Andrew Musaina Kihugwa

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer After Close of Prosecution Case

  1. 1 Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the accused to warrant placing him on his defence for the charge of murder.
  2. 2 Whether the evidence adduced establishes the essential ingredients of murder as defined under Section 203 of the Penal Code.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against the accused by presenting evidence that, if believed, would be sufficient to sustain a conviction for murder. The evidence included eyewitness testimony placing the accused with the deceased, the recovery and identification of the murder weapon, and the deceased's dying declaration naming the accused as her assailant. The court held that the prosecution had met the threshold required at this stage, namely, that a reasonable tribunal could convict if no explanation is offered by the defence. Accordingly, the accused was placed on his defence pursuant to Section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Court Disposition

Accused placed on his defence to answer the charge of murder.

Orders

  • The accused is placed on his defence to answer the charge of murder pursuant to Section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.