https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/8464

Republic v Bor (Criminal Case E008 of 2022) [2026] KEHC 8464 (KLR) (17 June 2026) (Judgment) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 8464 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the High Court at Kitale Criminal Case E008 of 2022 RK Limo, J June 17, 2026 Between Republic Prosecution and Simon Kipyego Bor Accused Judgment 1.Simon Kipyego Bor, the accused herein is charged with murder contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code. The particulars are that on 5/4/2022 at Moi Farm in Kiminini Sub County within Trans-Nzoia County murdered Josephine Nangege (the deceased herein). 2.The accused denied committing the offence and the prosecution has presented a total of 7 witnesses to prove the charge against the accused. The accused on the other hand insisted he is innocent and called 3 witnesses in support of his defence. The prosecution’s case is hinged on circumstantial evidence and below is the evidence tendered during trial. 3.Moses Juma Wanjala (PW1) a “Nyumba Kumi” operative testified that on 5/4/2022 at around midnight, Richard Kipruto a brother to the accused called him to their home and that on reaching there he found the family of the accused Richard Kipruto, the accused and Josephine (wife to accused) standing outside the house of one of the children of the accused named Giddy. He stated that Richard asked him to go inside and see how drunk a certain lady looked. That he went inside the house and found the deceased seated naked with her head facing down appearing very weak. 4.He stated that he called the deceased and she raised her head and looked at him. That he asked the accused if he could call the father to the deceased but the accused told him to call the mother instead. 5.He stated that he then proceeded to the home of the deceased and as he left a fellow “Nyumba kumi” member arrived and accompanied him. He stated that they went and explained to the mother of the deceased what had happened and she instructed one of her daughters Phanice to accompany them back to the scene where the deceased was. 6.He stated that he then called another member of ‘Nyumba kumi’ named Betty Ngaira to beef up their strength. That when they reached the scene, Phanice carried the deceased on her back and proceeded to their home. He stated that he also left for his home and that at around 4am Betty Ngaira called him and reported that the deceased had died. 7.He recalled that he was the first person to enter the house where the deceased was and that he saw some bruises around the thighs which indicated that the deceased had been beaten. He stated that the deceased was inside the house of one Giddy who is a son of the accused herein. That he was aware that Giddy and the deceased were lovers though the deceased was someone’s wife. He recalled that Bor’s family (family of the accused) were displeased about the relationship as they felt the deceased was misleading Giddy a young man. He stated that the complaints had been made to him severally prior to the incident and that he tried to resolve the issue in vain. 8.Isaac Kiprono (PW2) on his part testified that on 5/4/2022 at around midnight Richard Kipruto called him to his place and when they arrived at the home of the accused he found Joy (deceased) seated inside the house. That the deceased’s body had a lot of dust and appeared very weak. He stated that the deceased was only in her pant and brassier. That PW1 arrived and he told him that it was advisable they notify the deceased’s relatives since she was naked. 9.He stated that when they reached at the home of the deceased, her mother expressed disgust over the deceased saying she had become unruly and that she had tried to stop her relationship with Giddy in vain. 10.He stated that they left with Phanice, a sister to the deceased and they called one Betty Ngaira to help them in dressing up the deceased. That when they arrived at the scene, they tried to help the deceased they realized she could not walk as her legs could not support her. That Phanice carried her on her back to their home. That the following morning he learnt that Joy (deceased) had died. He recalled that when he arrived at the homestead, Gedion Chirchir, a son to the deceased was not present. That he knew Gedion and the deceased were lovers though the parents of Giddy did not approve of the relationship. That at the time Gedion was a young man at the university. 11.Betty Ngaira (PW3), another ‘Nyumba kumi’ operative testified that on 5/4/2023 while she was asleep at her house she was woken up by a knock on the door and when she inquired she realized it was a fellow ‘Nyumba kumi’ member known as Moses. She stated that she went out and met PW1 and PW2 who informed her about Joy (deceased). That she was requested to go and dress her as she was reportedly naked. 12.She stated that it was around 1am but she proceeded together with Phanice and the 2 ‘Nyumba kumi’ members and went to where the deceased was and found her lying down inside the house. She said that the deceased had as skirt which had cropped up to the waist area and a blouse around her breasts. That they pulled down the skirt and the blouse and since she could not walk, Phanice carried her on her back. 13.She stated that she assisted them by lighting the route home using a phone torch light. That when they reached home, the deceased asked for water and she was given. She stated that she advised them to take the deceased to hospital since the deceased could not even sit on her own and that she then left for her home. 14.She stated that at around 4am she heard screams from deceased’s home and when she went to inquire she found that the deceased had died. 15.She stated under cross-examination that the deceased was inside Giddy’s house and not the house of the accused and that she saw her drunk and weak but still alive. 16.Phanice Wanjala (PW4), a sister to the deceased recalled that on 5/4/2022 at around midnight one Rono a village elder called her and her mother as well. That her mother asked her to wake up and go find out what was happening. That Rono told her that her sister (deceased) had been beaten and was naked. She stated that Rono told her that the deceased was at accused’s home. That she got some clothes and accompanied Rono and passed by Betty’s (PW3) home who was chairperson ‘Nyumba kumi’. 17.She stated that they then headed to the home of the accused which was about 500M away. She stated that they found the deceased lying down inside the house in the compound of the accused. That when they entered the house, they found the wife of the accused and her sister in law. That she entered the bedroom and found her sister lying down with her skirt pulled up to the waist and a top that had been torn. She said that her sister had a pant and appeared beaten with signs of lashes on her thighs. 18.She stated that she also saw pieces of broken sticks inside the house and the deceased told her that she had been beaten. That she appeared weak but stated;“Wanandi wamenichapa wameniua”That the deceased requested her to take her to hospital. 19.She stated that the deceased was unable to stand on her own and she dragged her to the sitting room and requested Betty (PW3) to help her put the deceased on her back so that she could carry her home. 20.She stated that she called a boda boda who took them to a private hospital at Moi’s Bridge where the deceased was treated but between 3 and 4am a medical officer went to where she was waiting and informed her that the deceased had succumbed. That the nurses at the hospital asked her to report the matter at Simatwet police station. 21.She identified the broken sticks in court which she said were inside the room where the deceased was found beaten. 22.She clarified that the deceased was alive when she arrived and stated that the deceased said she had been beaten by Nandis but did not mention anyone by name. 23.She stated that she did not know who beat her deceased sister inside Gedion’s house in the home of the accused. She stated that she was aware that Gedion dated her deceased sister. 24.Brenda Nanjala (PW5) stated that on 4/4/2022 the deceased who was her aunt informed her that her money in her phone in Mpesa account had been stolen. 25.She stated that they were four in the deceased’s house with Jebet and Gedion. That they headed to Sirende police station using a boda boda adding that the deceased reported that Kshs.20,000/- had been stolen. That when they reached Sirende police station, the deceased went to report the theft as they remained outside. 26.She stated that the police did some investigations and called Safaricom. That it was then discovered that one Gimas had transferred the money into his account and the police went for him. She stated that the police returned shortly with the said Gimas and went into the police station. That after a few minutes, the deceased went to them and told them that her money had been returned. She stated that they then headed to Simatwet and went into a hotel for lunch. That after lunch they decided to visit a friend who sold changaa where they took drinks until 7.30pm. That they then went to a Club known as Zebra and took drinks until 11pm. She stated that she was taking soft drinks but the deceased and Gedion were taking beer. 27.She further stated that they then headed to ‘matanga’ to condole with Shitawa’s wife and that they used a boda boda. That when they reached the gate of Shitawa the deceased and her boyfriend one Gedion remained at the gate. That they stayed at Shitawa’s place until 1am and when she went out she did not find the deceased and her boyfriend Gedion and when she inquired she was told that they had left. 28.She stated that she then walked home and decided to pass by the deceased’s home where she found many people milling around and when she inquired her mother scolded her asking her how her aunt be killed in her presence. That she went inside the house and found the deceased lying down in her bedroom in a bad state and not talking. That she was lying facing down. She stated that she asked Phanice (PW4) to help in taking the deceased to hospital and they used a boda boda to take her to hospital where they found nurses at the hospital who helped and took the deceased inside the hospital for treatment. That later the nurses went back and reported to them that the deceased had passed on. 29.She stated that her aunt was beaten but she did not know who beat her and that she last saw her alive at Shitawa’s place with Gedion on 5/4/2022 at around 11pm but did not know what transpired thereafter. That the deceased was crying in pain when she saw her thereafter but did not tell her who had caused the pain. 30.PC Dickson Nzuki (PW6) stated that on 5/4/2022 at around 8am the DCIO Kiminini told him to visit a scene at Simatwet because a murder report had been reported. 31.He stated that they proceeded to Simatwet Patrol Base and found an OB entry No.2/5/4/22 on murder report. He stated that he took over the investigations and did preliminary investigations together with OCS Sirende police station. That he together with Scene of Crime officers visited the home of a suspect which was the primary scene of the crime. That it was believed that the deceased was assaulted there. 32.He stated that they documented the scene and then proceeded to Moi’s Bridge to a Health Centre where the deceased had been treated the previous night. That they found the body of the deceased still lying in the said facility. 33.He stated that he learnt from the health facility that the deceased was pronounced dead on arrival and was never treated. 34.He stated that the body of the deceased had visible injuries on the head and upper part of the body. He stated that after documenting the body, they transferred it to Cherangany Nursing Home for preservation. 35.He stated that a suspect had been arrested and placed in custody at Simatwet police patrol base and later escorted to Kitale police station before being arraigned for murder. He stated that he recorded statements from witnesses. That the accused person opposed the relationship between the deceased and his son Gedion because the deceased was a divorcee and much older than his son. Asked why he did not suspect the said son for committing the crime, the officer stated that the young man had no issue with his relationship with the deceased. 36.He further stated that he found some broken sticks in the house in which the deceased was found assaulted but did not dust them for finger prints. He stated that he could not get Gedion Kipchirchir the son of the accused for a statement because he took off after the incident and has not been traced. 37.He conceded that the mother of the deceased was also against the relationship between the deceased and Giddy. That there was no eye witness to the incident and that the deceased may not have mentioned who beat or assaulted her because of the pain inflicted on her. 38.Dr Fred Tulel (PW7) testified that he carried out Post Mortem examination on 6/4/2022 on the body of deceased upon identification of the same by Kennedy Wanyonyi and James Makimba. 39.He stated that the body was naked and at the time of examination, it was in rigor mortis state (stiffness). The doctor stated that he made the following findings;i.Externallya.Bleeding under the skin on the right thigh measuring 10cm by 14cm near the knee region.b.Bruises on the left thigh measuring 14x15cmc.Both shoulders had bruises with bleeding under the skin.d.Bruises on the forehead 7x5cme.Bruises on the lumber region and thoracic region.ii.Internallya.Bleeding on the scalp in occipital region.b.Subdural hematoma occipital region.c.Bleeding into the brain. 40.The doctor opined that the deceased in light of his findings died because of severe head injury secondary to subdural hematoma. He stated that he issued a Burial Permit serial No.0164237 and tendered Post Mortem report as PExhibit 2. 41.When put on his defence, the accused Simon Kipyego Bor (DW1) denied committing the offence. He recalled that on 5/4/2022 at around midnight he heard some commotion in his son’s house. That the son is known as Gedion Kipchirchir. 42.He stated that he woke up and went into the house to find out what was happening and found that the lights were on and there was a lady sitting inside. He stated that his son Gedion was not in but was present during the day. 43.He stated that he found the lady weak, seated and drunk. That he did not speak to her but instead called his brother Richard Kipruto to come. That his brother went and called members of ‘Nyumba kumi’ Moses Juma and Isaac Kiprono who was also a village elder. 44.He stated that the two went and called the relatives of the deceased who went and took the deceased lady away on foot. 45.He stated that the next day he was arrested and later charged. He stated that he knew the deceased and that her family took her from his home when she was alive. 46.He stated that his son Gedion Kipchirchir disappeared from home from that day and he did not know where he went. He further stated that the deceased was taken away from the house of his son and he did not have any issue with her. He denied assaulting her and stated that he was with his wife at the material time. 47.When pressed under cross-examination he stated that he was surprised to find the deceased in his son’s house. That his son was above 18 years and was a university student at Great Lakes University. He said that he knew the deceased as a neighbour and that she was much older than his son and was previously married but divorced. 48.Josephine Jerotich (DW2) a wife to the accused stated that on 5/4/2022 at around midnight while sleeping, she heard noises outside and her husband went out to check. That he stayed for a while and she followed him to Gedion’s house and found a lady neighbour who was injured. She stated that Gedion was not present though he was during the day. 49.She confirmed that her son Gedion disappeared that day and has not been seen since then. 50.She stated that her husband called her brother in law Richard Kipruto who called members of ‘Nyumba kumi’. 51.That members of ‘Nyumba kumi’ came and the family members of the deceased came and took her. According to her the deceased was talking but was drunk. That she did not know who assaulted her. 52.She added that the deceased was much older than her son Gedion and she was displeased that her son was seeing a much older woman and a drunkard at that. She however in an about turn stated that she did not know about the relationship between the two. 53.Richard Kipruto (DW3) a brother to the accused testified and confirmed that on 5/4/2022 at around midnight his brother, the accused herein called him and he rushed there to find the accused and his wife at Gedion’s house. He stated that he stood outside asking them what was going on and they told him that the deceased was inside the house and he looked and saw her. 54.He stated that the deceased was much older than Gedion and did not expect to see her in Gedion’s house. 55.He stated that they decided to call ‘Nyumba kumi’ and the village elder. That the two persons came and saw the deceased inside the house of Gedion and recognized her. 56.That the two decided to go and call the relatives of the deceased. That they went and came back with the sister of the deceased who took her away while walking. He denied beating her. 57.Erick Asiki (DW4) a boda boda rider testified that on 5/4/2022 he was called by Phanice (PW4) to go and take someone who was sick to hospital. That he went and found the deceased looking sick and crying. That he took her to Sisters Health Centre in Moi’s Bridge on a boda boda with deceased’s sisters. He stated that the deceased was talking but he did not hear about the person who beat her. 58.At the close of the defence case only the prosecution filed its final written submission which I will consider as I evaluate the evidence tendered with a view to disposing this case. 59.The accused herein as observed above is charged with the offence of murder under Section 203 of the Penal Code. Section 203 of the Penal Code provides;“Any person who of malice aforethought causes death of another person by an unlawful act or omission is guilty of murder”.The above shows that for an offence of murder to stand the following ingredients must be established and proved by the prosecution to the required standard in Criminal Law which is always beyond reasonable doubt.a.Fact of death and its cause.b.Actus reus or that the accused through acts of omission or commission unlawfully caused the death.c.Malice aforethought or mens rea. 60.(a) Fact of death and its cause.This element is not contested. It is not denied that the deceased died and the cause of death was not attributable to natural causes but through deliberate acts of a person (s) whose intention was to cause grevious harm or death. The medical evidence by Dr Tulel Losiamoi (PW7) who tendered Post Mortem report (Pexhibit 2) corroborates the evidence of PW1 and PW4. This court finds that the fact of death was clearly established by Dr.Tulel (PW7) who testified that he issued a Burial Permit with respect to the body of deceased serial No.0164237 after conducting autopsy. The fact of death and the cause therefore are well established. 61.(b) Actus Reus.The prosecution maintains that the accused was involved in acts that caused the death of the deceased because the incident happened late at night in the house of Gedion who is the son of the accused. The State contends that the accused’s family was quite displeased with the relationship between the deceased and their son Gedion Kipchirchir. 62.The defence on the other hand maintained even during submission on no case to answer that the scene of the incident was not linked to the accused but the house of Gedion the son of the accused. He further contends that the deceased died elsewhere and not in his compound. He contends that when the deceased left his compound she was still talking. 63.This court finds that going by the evidence tendered it is apparent that the prosecution’s case against the accused is purely based on circumstantial evidence. There was no witness availed who witnessed the incident. It is now well settled that for conviction to lie in a case based on circumstantial evidence, it must satisfy the following requirements or conditions well illustrated in the case of Musili Tulo –vs- Republic (2014) KECA 412 (KLR);i.The circumstances from which inference of guilt is sought to be drawn, must be cogent and firmly established.ii.The circumstances must be of a definite tendency unerringly pointing towards guilt of the accused andiii.The circumstances taken cumulatively should form a chain so complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that within all human probability the crime was committed by the accused and none else. 64.This court is further guided by the Court of Appeal decision in the case of Mohammed & Anor –vs- Republic (2018) KECA 743 (KLR) where the court referencing the decision in R –vs- Taylor, Weaver and Donovan (1928) Cr App R.21 observed that;“Circumstantial evidence is often the best. It is evidence of surrounding circumstances which by undersigned coincidence is capable of proving a proposition with the accuracy of mathematics….” 65.This court is further guided by the Court of Appeal decision in the case of Sawe –vs- Republic (2203) KECA 182 (KLR) where the court made the following observations;i.In order to justify on circumstantial evidence, the inference of guilt, the inculpatory facts must be incompatible with the innocence of the accused and incapable of explanation upon any other reasonable hypothesis than that of his guilty.ii.Circumstantial evidence could be a basis of a conviction only if there was no other existing circumstances weakening the chain of circumstances relied on.iii.The burden of proving facts which justified the drawing of the inference from the fact to the exclusion of any other reasonable hypothesis of innocence was on the prosecution”.“That burden always remained on the prosecution”. 66.Let me now turn to the facts coming out from the evidence tendered in this case. From the evidence of Brenda Wanjala (PW5), one gets a clear picture of what transpired during the day before the deceased was found in the compound of the accused in the house of Gedion aka Giddy who is the son to the accused. PW5 says that during the day on 4/4/2022 the deceased who was in the company of Gedion, Jebet and herself at their house discovered that someone had stolen her money (Kshs.20,000) from her Mpesa account in her phone. The 4 decided to report the matter at Sirende police station. After investigations by the police it was discovered that one Gimas who was well known to them was the culprit and the police went for him. 67.The issue appears to have been resolved when the said Gimas conceded and refunded the money. When the money was refunded, the group including the deceased and Gedion decided to go for lunch at a nearby joint. The evidence shows that after lunch the group proceeded to a den selling illicit brew (changaa) and drank before going to a Club known as Zebra where they continued drinking until 11pm. All the while, PW5 says it is the deceased who was paying the bills perhaps from the recovery of her Kshs.20,000/- earlier made at Sirende police station. It is apparent that all through the deceased and Gedion were drinking with the group and having fun. 68.From Zebra Club, PW5 says they decided to proceed to ‘matanga’ to condole with a certain lady known as Shitawa who had lost a relative. That when they reached at the gate of Shitawa, PW5 and one Jebet went inside but the deceased and her boyfriend Gedion remained at the gate and that was the last time PW5 says she saw the 2 because at 1am when they came out of the ‘matanga’ the deceased and Gedion had left and when they proceeded home they found her (deceased) badly beaten and not talking. 69.From that narrative it is apparent that the deceased and Gedion left their friends at Shitawa’s place and proceeded to Gedion’s home which was to turned out to be the scene of murder. 70.This court has considered the evidence of PW1 and PW4 as well as the evidence of the accused and his witnesses. PW1 says that on 5/4/2022 at around midnight he was called by Richard Kipruto (DW3) and informed of the presence of deceased at Gedion’s house which was within the compound of the accused. He found her half naked and looking very weak and signs of beatings from her thighs and decided to go and get her family. The same narrative was corroborated by Isaac Kiprono (PW2) who is a village elder in the locality. 71.From the evidence of Phanice Wanjala (PW4) who is the sister to the deceased, it is clear that she was woken up by PW2 and informed that her sister (deceased) had been beaten at the accused’s place and was told that she was naked and that is why she says she went with some clothes and called Betty Ngaira (PW3) another ‘Nyumba kumi’ operative to accompany them. She found her beaten with signs of lashes on her thighs. She also saw broken pieces of sticks in the house and the only thing the deceased told her was;“Wanandi wamenichapa wameniua’ and asked her to take her to hospital. PW4 says the deceased could not stand and she had to drag her from the bedroom to the sitting room where Betty (PW3) helped her to put the deceased on her back and she carried her. 72.The accused says in his defence that at around midnight he heard a commotion from his son’s (Gedion) house and went to check and found the deceased seated on a chair looking weak and drunk. That he then called his brother Richard Bor (DW3) who went to the scene and called PW1 and PW2. 73.What comes out clearly is that the deceased was beaten in Gedion’s house and that must have taken place between 11pm and midnight because PW5 left the deceased and Gedion at around 11pm at Shitawa’s gate. It is apparent from the witness’s account that the distance between Shitawa’s place or home of the deceased to that of the accused is a walking distance. Some witnesses put the estimate to be around 500 metres. 74.The big question that needs answers is who beat the deceased? There is no doubt that she was badly beaten at Gedion’s house and from the evidence of PW5 and the investigating officer (PW6) it is quite apparent that it was not Gedion. Gedion aka Giddy was dating her despite stiff opposition from both his parents (DW1 and DW2) and deceased’s mother as per evidence of the village elder (Isaac Kiprono) PW2. 75.It is also apparent from the evidence of PW5 that Gedion and the deceased appear to have had fun during the day and were together throughout. The fact that the said Gedion reportedly accompanied her to Sirende police station to find out who had stolen his girlfriend’s money in my view is an indication that the said Gedion cared for her. He spent time drinking with her after the money was recovered and the two love birds later retreated to his house. It is unfathomable that the same Gedion would turn against her in the middle of the night and beat her senselessly. 76.It is also apparent that the deceased was much older than the said Gedion. The evidence tendered shows that she was a divorcee and a drunkard while Gedion was a young man and a student at Great Lakes University. He was destined for a great future. It is against that background that one can see the sense in which the parents of Gedion were displeased with the relationship. DW2 stated under cross-examination that she;“was not happy that my son was seeing a much older woman who was a drunkard”. The accused in his evidence stated as much. That he knew the deceased very well as a neighbour and that she was previously married but had divorced and was surprised to find her in his son’s house. 77.It is therefore quite obvious given the circumstances that the only person who was motivated to end that queer relationship between a young university student and a divorcee (deceased) was the parents. No parent would want such a situation to affect their future or careers of their children. 78.In light of the circumstances obtaining, this court finds that only the accused and perhaps his wife were in close proximity with both lovers that is the deceased and Gedion and were motivated to end that relationship by whatever means because of their son (Gedion). The reasons or basis of the conclusion are as follows;i.The incident happened very late at night in the compound of the accused inside the house of Gedion.ii.If the assailant was from outside, Gedion obviously could have resisted or helped his lover and the only person Gedion would fear is his own father.iii.The accused and his wife (DW2) say they heard noises or commotion inside Gedion’s house but did not find anyone but the deceased alone. This indicates that the only persons present in that compound that fateful night were Gedion’s parents on one hand and Gedion and the deceased on the other.iv.From the evidence of PW5 it is apparent that Gedion and deceased spent time together drinking and generally had a good time during the day. There was no evidence if there was any disagreement between the two to make the court get doubts as to who inflicted those beatings noticed by PW1, PW4 and the doctor (PW7).v.PW1 stated in his evidence that “there were complaints by Bor’s (accused) family that Joy (deceased) was misleading a young man, Giddy. The complaint was brought to me on several instances. I tried to settle the issue in vain.” This is an indication that the accused’s family had tried in vain to bring to an end the relationship between the deceased and his son (Gedion). PW2 the village elder stated as much in his testimony. 79.This court finds that going by the evidence tendered the circumstances form a chain that points to the accused as the culprit or part of the persons who caused those injuries from which the deceased later died. 80.I have considered the fact that the deceased did not mention the accused and while I caution myself that the fact might be taken to weaken the inference of guilt of the accused, I have considered the evidence of Dr Fred Tulel (PW7). He says that he noted a swelling in the brain of the deceased and in his opinion a person with that kind of injury cannot speak. That opinion in my view helps to explain why the deceased was only heard by PW4 uttering the words “wanandi wamenichapa wameniua”. According to prosecution witnesses the deceased was too weak and not talking when taken home and eventually to hospital. DW4 supports that contention but the other defence witnesses maintained that the deceased was talking and was alive when she was carried away. 81.This court finds that from the evidence placed before court the deceased was simply too weak to stand and had to be dragged along the ground before PW4 carried her on her back. So while the deceased was carried alive from the house of Gedion, she had suffered serious injuries in the hands of the accused from which she later succumbed at a health centre at Mois’s Bridge. 82.This court finds that the circumstances obtaining as illustrated above form a chain that is so complete to draw an inescapable conclusion that the accused incensed at the relationship between his young son Gedion and a much older deceased, beat her and caused her death. The element of actus reus is proved beyond any doubt in my view. 83.(c)Mens reaThe prosecution’s case as clearly illustrated above established the motive behind the injuries and the resultant death of the deceased. The accused and his family were simply displeased at the fact that their son, a university student was being misled by a much older lady, a divorcee and a drunkard at that. The motive is therefore clear. However this court finds that the accused may not have really intended to kill the deceased. That in my view could explain why he called a village elder and ‘Nyumba kumi’ operatives. 84.It is on that ground that this court finds that though the injuries inflicted were quite serious, the accused may have been incensed and just out to ‘save’ his son and his career. It is only on that consideration that the accused perhaps just wanted to discipline the deceased and stop her from dating his son. Of course it was highly regrettable that it is in the pursuit to salvage his son’s future, the accused went overboard. The accused should have used alternative mode of resolving the problem the way he had tried in the past.In the premises, this court finds that the prosecution’s case has been proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed manslaughter. He is therefore convicted of the lesser charge of manslaughter contrary to Section 206 of the Penal Code and he is hereby accordingly convicted. DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED AT KITALE THIS 17TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026.HON JUSTICE R.K. LIMOKITALE HIGH COURTJudgment delivered in open courtIn the presence ofSerebe holding brief for Teti for accusedMugun for the StateAccused – presentDuke/Chemosop- court assistants