[2017] KEHC 2570 (KLR)
The court found that, based on the evidence presented by the prosecution and without delving into detailed analysis that could prejudice the accused's defence, a prima facie case had been established against Francis Makori Ombati. The contradictions and alleged lack of motive raised by the defence were not...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEHC 2570 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Francis Makori Ombati
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 75 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer After Close of Prosecution Case
- Outcome
- Accused placed on his defence.
- Judges
- J Wakiaga
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Prima Facie Case, 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
Applicant
Francis Makori Ombati
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 placing him on his defence.
- 2 Whether contradictions in the prosecution's evidence undermine the case at this stage.
- 3 Whether motive is necessary to establish a prima facie case for murder.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that, based on the evidence presented by the prosecution and without delving into detailed analysis that could prejudice the accused's defence, a prima facie case had been established against Francis Makori Ombati. The contradictions and alleged lack of motive raised by the defence were not sufficient at this stage to displace the prosecution's case. The court therefore ruled that the accused should be placed on his defence in accordance with Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Court Disposition
Accused placed on his defence.
Orders
- The accused is placed on his defence under Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
- The accused is advised of his rights.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 75 OF 2013
REPUBLIC.........................................................PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
FRANCIS MAKORI OMBATI....................................ACCUSED
RULING
1. The accused FRANCIS MAKORI OMBATI was charged with the offence of murder contrary to Section 203as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code the particulars of which were that on the 3rd day of July, 2013 at Kayaba slum in Industrial Area within Nairobi County murdered one VINCENT AMBUYA.
2. He pleaded not guilty to the said charge and to prove its case against the same the prosecution called a total of seven (7) witnesses and at the close of the prosecution case, parties were invited to make submissions on whether the prosecution had established a prima facie case to enable the court place the accused on his defence.
SUBMISSIONS
3. On behalf of the accused it was submitted that the prosecution case was full of contradictions as whether the chair produced is the one that had been used to hit the deceased. It was further submitted that the prosecution had failed to establish the motive for the offence. On behalf of the prosecution it was submitted that the accused was not in any danger to warrant the use of the chair on the deceased. It was submitted that the accused was placed at the scene.
4. In the case of REPUBLIC v SAMWEL KARANJA KURIA CRIMINAL CASE NO. 130 OF 2004 Nairobi (2009) eKLR Justice J.B Ojwang (as he then was) set out what to be considered at this stage in the following terms:-
“The question at this stage is not whether or not the accused is guilty as charged but whether there is such cogent evidence of his connection with the circumstances in which the killing of the deceased occurred, that the concept of prima facie case dictates as a matter of law that an opportunity be created by this court for the accused to state his own case regarding the killing. The governing law on this point is well settled”………
In the Court of Appeal No. 77 of 2006 the Court of Appeal expressed that too detailed analysis of the evidence, at no case to answer stage is undesirable if the court is going to put the accused onto his defence as too much details in the trial court’s ruling could then compromise the evidentiary quality of the defence to be mounted.”
5. From the evidence placed before the court and without committing further therein so as not to compromise the accused’s intended defence, if any, I am satisfied that a prima facie case has been established by the prosecution to enable me place the accused on his defence which I hereby do. The accused is therefore advised of his rights under Section 306 of Criminal Procedure Code.
DATED, DELIVERED and SIGNED at Nairobi this 11th day of October, 2017.
..........................
J. WAKIAGA
JUDGE
In the presence of:-
Mrs. Kinoti for the State
Mr. Saenyi for the Accused
Accused person present
Court clerk Tabitha