[2015] KEHC 4624 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution had adduced sufficient evidence, including testimony from witnesses and expert reports, to establish a prima facie case against the accused. The evidence, if uncontroverted, would be sufficient to warrant a conviction. Therefore, the accused is required to be put on his defence...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] KEHC 4624 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Bernard Githua Kiragu
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 84 of 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer After Close of Prosecution Case
- Outcome
- The accused is found to have a case to answer and is put on his defence.
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Prima Facie Case, 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
Bernard Githua Kiragu
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 putting him on his defence.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution had adduced sufficient evidence, including testimony from witnesses and expert reports, to establish a prima facie case against the accused. The evidence, if uncontroverted, would be sufficient to warrant a conviction. Therefore, the accused is required to be put on his defence in accordance with Section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The court informed the accused of his rights regarding the manner of giving evidence and calling witnesses in his defence.
Court Disposition
The accused is found to have a case to answer and is put on his defence.
Orders
- The accused is put on his defence in accordance with Section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
- The accused is informed of his right to address the court, to give evidence on oath or otherwise, and to call witnesses in his defence.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
15 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 84 OF 2011
REPUBLIC…………………………………………………PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
BERNARD GITHUA KIRAGU………………………………ACCUSED
RULING
Bernard Githua Kiragu, the accused, is charged with murder contrary to section 203 read with section 204 of the Penal Code. The particulars of the charge read that on 28th day of September 2011 at Wanguthu Village, Kanunga sub-location within Kiambu County he murdered Susan Njeri.
I took over the conduct of this trial after two witnesses had testified before my sister judge Hon. Lady Justice Florence Muchemi. I heard five witnesses. On 14th May 2015 the prosecution closed its case. Both the prosecution and the defence opted not to make any submissions at this stage. This leaves the court with the single task of determining if the prosecution evidence against the accused is sufficient to warrant the accused being put on his defence.
I have examined and analysed all the evidence on record including the reports from the pathologist and the government analyst. My conclusion on the issue at hand is that the evidence is sufficient to lead this court to conclude that a prima facie case has been made out against the accused person to require him defend himself. I will, and do, hereby make a finding that the accused has a case to answer. He is hereby put on his defence.
As required by the law, Section 306 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, I hereby inform him of his right to address the court either in person or through his advocate. He has a right to inform this court how he wishes to tender evidence in his defence, either by taking an oath or without taking an oath as well as whether he wishes to call any witnesses in support of his defence.
It is so ordered.
Dated, signed and delivered this 27th May 2015.
S. N. MUTUKU
JUDGE