[2018] KEHC 8022 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution had presented sufficient credible evidence, particularly from PW1, directly implicating both accused persons in the assault that led to the death of the deceased. The evidence, when taken at its highest, established a prima facie case against the accused persons. The court...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEHC 8022 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Grace Mokeira Orura; Defendant: Ezna Kemunto Orura
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kisii
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 4 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on a Case to Answer Under Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code
- Outcome
- Accused persons found to have a case to answer and placed on their defence.
- Judges
- WA Okwany
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Prima Facie Case, Burden of Proof, Criminal Procedure
- 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
Grace Mokeira Orura
Defendant
Ezna Kemunto Orura
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on a Case to Answer Under Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the accused persons to warrant their being placed on their defence under Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
- 2 Whether the evidence presented 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 presented sufficient credible evidence, particularly from PW1, directly implicating both accused persons in the assault that led to the death of the deceased. The evidence, when taken at its highest, established a prima facie case against the accused persons. The court applied the standard set out in Ramanlal Trambaklal Bhatt v Republic, holding that the prosecution's case was not based on a mere scintilla of evidence but on credible testimony that, if believed, could sustain a conviction. Therefore, the accused persons were required to be placed on their defence in accordance with Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Court Disposition
Accused persons found to have a case to answer and placed on their defence.
Orders
- Both accused persons are placed on their defence under Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
30 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KISII
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 4 OF 2017
REPUBLIC................................................PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
GRACE MOKEIRA ORURA...................1ST ACCUSED
EZNA KEMUNTO....................................2ND ACCUSED
RULING ON A CASE TO ANSWER
1. The accused persons herein, GRACE MOKEIRA ORURAand EZNA KEMUNTO ORURAare mother and daughter respectively. They face the charge of murder contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code. The particulars of the offence are that between 21st and 22nd February 2017, at Nyamesocho Sub-location in Masaba-South Sub-county within Kisii County in the Republic of Kenya jointly murdered ELIJAH ORURA MASESE.
2. At the trial, the prosecution presented the evidence of 6 witnesses in support of its case and the case is now before me for a ruling on whether or not the accused persons have a case to answer under Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
3. A brief summary of the evidence tendered by the prosecution witness was as follows:
4. PW1 S.M. (particulars withheld) was a minor and is the granddaughter of the deceased and the 1st accused. Her testimony was that on the night in question, the deceased was drunk and she witnessed the 1st accused wrestle him to the ground before she started beating him with a stick and the 2nd accused joined the fray by beating the deceased with split wood.
5. PW2 Charles Marube Masese visited the home of the deceased on the morning of 22nd February 2017 and found him lying in pain in the sitting room. He stated that the deceased was badly injured and requested him to escort him to hospital but that he unfortunately died on the way to hospital.
6. PW3 Charles Omwoyo Masese heard a commotion from the home of the deceased on the material night and that he noted that the deceased and the 1st accused were engaged in as they used to fight a lot. He did not intervene in the fight but on the following day he got word that the deceased was critically injured. The deceased unfortunately succumbed to his injuries as he was on his way to hospital.
7. PW4 Lucas Elijah learnt that the deceased had been assaulted and made efforts to take him to hospital in the company of PW2 and PW3.
8. PW5 was Julius Machogu, the assistant Chief of Bagungu Sub-location. On 22nd February 2017 he received a report from the 1st accused regarding a disagreement that she had with the deceased the previous night. He later received new that the deceased had been murdered.
9. PW6 P.C. Harun Muriuki was the investigating officer. He visited the deceased home after the incident, arrested the suspects and opened charges against them.
10. In determining whether or not the accused person has a case to answer, the court must establish if a prima facie case has been made out against the accused to warrant his/her being placed on her defence.
11. In the case of Ramanlal Trambaklal Bhatt -Vs- Republic (1957) E.A. 332 the court held:
"(i) The onus is on the prosecution to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and a prima facie case is not made out if at the close of the prosecution, the case is merely one which on full consideration might possibly be thought sufficient to sustain a conviction.
(ii) The question whether there is a case to answer cannot depend only on whether there is 'some' evidence irrespective of its credibility or weight sufficient to put the accused on his defence. A mere scintilla of evidence can never be enough; nor can any amount of worthless discredited evidence."
12. In the instant case, without saying much at this stage, I find that the prosecution established a prima facie case against the accused persons that would warrant their being placed on their defence. There was sufficient evidence especially form PW1, pointing towards their possible involvement in the death of the deceased.
13. I therefore find that the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the accused persons to warrant their being placed on their defence. Accordingly, I place them on their defence.
Delivered, dated and signed in at Kisii on 6th of March 2018.
W.A. OKWANY
JUDGE
In the presence of:
Mr. Otieno for the State
Mr. Okenye for the Accused
Omwoyo court clerk