[2006] KEHC 1346 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution had presented sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case against the accused for the offence of murder. The court rejected the defence's submission that the accused should be acquitted at this stage on grounds of insanity, holding that such a defence is to be considered...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2006] KEHC 1346 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Benard Khamala Mafuko
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Bungoma
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 7 of 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer After Close of Prosecution Case
- Outcome
- Accused placed on his defence.
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Criminal Liability, Insanity Defence
- 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
Benard Khamala Mafuko
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer After Close of Prosecution Case
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the accused to warrant his being placed on his defence.
- 2 Whether the accused was insane at the time of committing the offence and thus not criminally liable.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution had presented sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case against the accused for the offence of murder. The court rejected the defence's submission that the accused should be acquitted at this stage on grounds of insanity, holding that such a defence is to be considered only after the accused has been placed on his defence. Accordingly, the accused was called upon to enter his defence, and the question of criminal liability, including the insanity defence, would be determined after the defence case is heard.
Court Disposition
Accused placed on his defence.
Orders
- The accused is placed on his defence to answer the charge of murder.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
14 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT BUNGOMA Criminal Case 7 of 2004
REPUBLIC…………………...............................…………………………………………..PROSECUTOR
VS
BENARD KHAMALA MAFUKO…………………….............................………………………ACCUSED
RULING
The accused person in this case, Benard Khamala Mafuko is before this court facing a charge of murder contrary to section 203 as read with section 204 of the Penal Code. The particulars are that on the 17th day of December, 2000, at Bunjosi Village, Misikhu Location in Bungoma District within Western Province, murdered Edward Wanyama Wafula.
The prosecution closed its case after tendering the evidence of 5 witnesses.
Both the learned Principal State counsel and Mr. Ocharo advocate for the accused submitted under section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
It is the submission of Mr. Ocharo, that the accused is not criminally liable to the charge of murder because the accused was insane at the time of committing the offence. Mr. Onderi, the learned Principal state Counsel is of the view that the submission of the defence can only be entertained after the accused has been placed on his defence.
I have considered the evidence tendered in support of the case against the accused. I have also taken into account the detailed submissions. I am of the considered view that the evidence incriminates the accused as having committed the offence of murder. He is consequently placed on his defence. The issue is to whether the accused is criminal liable or not will be dealt with after the case has closed.
Dated and delivered this 13th day of September 2006.
J. K. SERGON
JUDGE
In open court in the presence of Mr. Aoga holding brief for Mr. Ocharo for the accused and Mr. Onderi for the state.