[2017] KEHC 2738 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution had adduced sufficient evidence through its witnesses to establish a prima facie case against all the accused persons. The evidence, if unchallenged, could potentially result in a conviction. Therefore, the accused persons are required to be placed on their defence in accordance...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEHC 2738 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Francis Mbare Fistus; Defendant: Japhet Mutembei Francis; Defendant: George Mwirigi Kiambi; Defendant: Ernest Gachovi Makembo; Defendant: Luciana Nkunu Kiambi; Defendant: Elizabeth Nekesa Mwirigi; Defendant: Fredrick Gikunda Kiambi
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 34 of 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer
- Outcome
- Accused persons found to have a case to answer and ordered to be placed on their 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
Francis Mbare Fistus
Defendant
Japhet Mutembei Francis
Defendant
George Mwirigi Kiambi
Defendant
Ernest Gachovi Makembo
Defendant
Luciana Nkunu Kiambi
Defendant
Elizabeth Nekesa Mwirigi
Defendant
Fredrick Gikunda Kiambi
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the accused persons to warrant their being placed on their defence.
- 2 Whether the evidence tendered by the prosecution is sufficient to require the accused to answer to the charge of murder.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution had adduced sufficient evidence through its witnesses to establish a prima facie case against all the accused persons. The evidence, if unchallenged, could potentially result in a conviction. Therefore, the accused persons are required to be placed on their defence in accordance with the law. The court accordingly ruled that each accused has a case to answer and directed that they be given an opportunity to present their defence, either by sworn statement and/or by calling witnesses as they may choose.
Court Disposition
Accused persons found to have a case to answer and ordered to be placed on their defence.
Orders
- Each accused person is found to have a case to answer and is placed on their defence.
- Defence hearing scheduled for 19th February 2018.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
46 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU
CRIMINAL CASE NO.34 OF 2008
REPUBLIC ............................................................PROSECUTION
VS
FRANCIS MBARE FISTUS.......................................1ST ACCUSED
JAPHET MUTEMBEI FRANCIS................................2ND ACCUSED
GEORGE MWIRIGI KIAMBI.....................................3RD ACCUSED
ERNEST GACHOVI MAKEMBO..............................4TH ACCUSED
LUCIANA NKUNU KIAMBI......................................5TH ACCUSED
ELIZABETH NEKESA MWIRIGI...............................6TH ACCUSED
FREDLICK GIKUNDA KIAMBI..................................7TH ACCUSED
RULING
The accused persons Francis Mbare Fistus, Japhet Mutembei Francis, George Mwirigi Kiambi, Ernest Gachovi Kiambi, Luciana Nkunu Kiambi, Elizabeth Nekesa Mwirigi and Fredrick Gikunda Kiambi were jointly charged with the offence of murder contrary to section 203 as read with section 204 of the penal code.
Particulars are that the accused persons on the 23rd day of April 2008 at Kuharene village Giathathi sub-location Mweru Location in Imenti South District within the Eastern Province (Now Meru County) jointly with others not before court murdered Francis Miriti.
Having considered the evidence tendered by prosecution witnesses this court finds that a prima facie case has been established against accused persons requiring that they should be placed on defence. They have a case to answer.
HON. A.ONG’INJO
JUDGE
Before Adwera _ Ong’injo J
Penina – Court Assistant
Mrs Mwathi for state
Mrs Ntarangwi Advocate for 2nd and 3rd for Accused person.
Mr Mbaabu Advocate for 1st Accused.
1st Accused – Present in person – Mr Kaimenyi Advocate for 4th to 7th Accused.
2nd Accused – Present in Person
3rd Accused – Present in person
4th Accused – Deceased N/A
5th Accused – Present in person
6th Accused – Present in person
7th Accused – Present in person
Ms Ntarangwi holding brief.
Court
Ruling, Delivered, Dated and signed in court this 12th Day of October 2017.
HON. A.ONG’INJO
JUDGE
Mrs Ntarangwi Advocate
The accused persons will give sworn statements.
Accused 1 and Accused 2 no witnesses.
Accused 3 – has one witness
Accused 4- has one witness
Accused 5 has a witness
Accused 6 – no witness.
Order
Defence hearing 19. 2.2018.
HON. A.ONG’INJO
JUDGE