[2013] KEHC 2157 (KLR)
The court found that although none of the nine prosecution witnesses directly witnessed the accused committing the murder, the circumstantial evidence presented, together with the medical evidence confirming death by strangulation, was sufficient to establish a prima facie case against the accused. The court held...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2013] KEHC 2157 (KLR)
- Parties
- Respondent: Republic; Applicant: David Kibet Kiplagat
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Eldoret
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 44 of 2007
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on a Case to Answer
- Outcome
- accused found to have a case to answer and put on his defence
- Judges
- AW Macharia
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Circumstantial Evidence, Case to Answer, 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
Respondent
David Kibet Kiplagat
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on a Case to Answer
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the accused to warrant putting him on his defence.
- 2 Whether the circumstantial evidence adduced is sufficient to require the accused to answer to the charge of murder.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that although none of the nine prosecution witnesses directly witnessed the accused committing the murder, the circumstantial evidence presented, together with the medical evidence confirming death by strangulation, was sufficient to establish a prima facie case against the accused. The court held that the strength of the circumstantial evidence and its implications for the accused's guilt should be determined at the judgment stage. Accordingly, the accused was found to have a case to answer and was put on his defence.
Court Disposition
accused found to have a case to answer and put on his defence
Orders
- The accused is put on his defence.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
16 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT ELDORET
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 44 OF 2007
REPUBLIC …................................................... PROSECUTOR/RESPONDENT
VERSUS
DAVID KIBET KIPLAGAT ........................................ ACCUSED/APPLICANT
RULING ON A CASE TO ANSWER
The accused David Kibet Kiplagat was charged with the offence of murder contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code.
Particulars of the charge are that on the night of 1st and 2nd day of September, 2007 at Kapkatet Village Lessos in Nandi South District of the Rift Valley Province, jointly with another not before court murdered Mary Jepkering.
A total of nine prosecution witnesses testified. None of them witnessed the accused murder the deceased. However, the circumstantial evidence surrounding the death of the deceased point a guilty finger at the accused. As to the strength of the same, I think should be left for determination in the Judgment.
The cause of death of the deceased was confirmed as strangulation, pointing at human activity.
Therefore prima facie, I find that the accused has a case to answer and I put him on his defence.
DATED and DELIVERED at ELDORET this 8th day of August, 2013.
G. W. NGENYE – MACHARIA
JUDGE
In the presence of: