[2019] KEHC 6451 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution's evidence, though circumstantial, was sufficient to establish a prima facie case against the accused. The evidence included the accused's alleged theft and recovery of items belonging to the deceased, threats made to the deceased, and the accused's subsequent sale of another...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEHC 6451 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Charles Mwangi Wairimu
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Murang'a
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 16 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer (section 306(2) Cpc)
- Outcome
- accused placed on his defence
- Judges
- K Kimondo
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Circumstantial Evidence, 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
Charles Mwangi Wairimu
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer (section 306(2) Cpc)
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 circumstantial evidence presented is sufficient to connect the accused to the murder of Virginia Wanjiru.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution's evidence, though circumstantial, was sufficient to establish a prima facie case against the accused. The evidence included the accused's alleged theft and recovery of items belonging to the deceased, threats made to the deceased, and the accused's subsequent sale of another phone linked to the deceased. Applying the legal standards from Bhatt v Republic and R v Kipkering arap Koske, the court held that the circumstantial evidence, if believed, could support a conviction. Therefore, under section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, the accused was placed on his defence to answer the charge of murder.
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
24 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MURANG’A
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 16 OF 2013
REPUBLIC..........................................................................PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
CHARLES MWANGI WAIRIMU............................................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 6th September 2013 at Gathiani Sub-location, Makomboki Location within Murang’a County, he murdered Virginia Wanjiru.
3. He pleaded notguilty. The prosecution lined up ninewitnesses.
4. The prosecution’s case is largely built on circumstantial evidence.
5. PW4 worked in a hair salon with the deceased. She said that on 6th September 2013, the accused stole a mobile phone make Bird and Kshs 500 from the salon. The cellphone belonged to the deceased’s brother. The deceased recovered the cellphone from the accused. She told the witness that the accused had threatened her with a knife.
6. The Kshs 500 was recovered from the accused through the intervention of a village elder (PW5). The deceased was murdered the same evening on her way home.
7. There is then the evidence of PW2 and PW8. It suggests that another cellphone make Forme gifted to the deceased by PW2 was sold by the accused to a person named Njuguna a few days after the murder. There is the additional evidence from the pathologist (PW9).
8. Applying the test in Bhatt v Republic [1957] E.A. 332 and R v Kipkering arap Koske & another16 EACA 135 (1949) I find that the Republic has established a prima facie case.
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 24th day of June 2019.
KANYI KIMONDO
JUDGE
Ruling read in open court in the presence of-
Accused.
Ms. R. Gichuru for the Republic.
Ms. Dorcas and Ms. Elizabeth, Court Clerks.