[2015] KEHC 5469 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution had adduced sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case against the accused. The judge held that, upon considering the evidence on record and the submissions of both counsel, the threshold for a prima facie case had been met. Therefore, the accused should be put on her...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] KEHC 5469 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Hadija Kandu Asif alias Mwende
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Garissa
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 1 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on No Case to Answer at Close of Prosecution Evidence
- Outcome
- Accused to be put on her defence.
- Judges
- GMA Dulu
- Legal Topics
- No Case to Answer, Prima Facie Case, 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
Hadija Kandu Asif alias Mwende
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on No Case to Answer at Close of Prosecution Evidence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the accused to warrant putting her on her defence.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution had adduced sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case against the accused. The judge held that, upon considering the evidence on record and the submissions of both counsel, the threshold for a prima facie case had been met. Therefore, the accused should be put on her defence to explain the circumstances or offer her version, as the evidence, if uncontroverted, could result in a conviction.
Court Disposition
Accused to be put on her defence.
Orders
- The accused is hereby put on her defence and will be informed of the alternatives available to her in law.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
15 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT GARISSA
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1 OF 2013
REPUBLIC…............................................STATE COUNSEL
VERSUS
HADIJA KANDU ASIF ‘ALIAS’ MWENDE ……………………ACCUSED
RULING
At the close of the prosecution evidence, Mr. Onono learned counsel for the defence made submissions on no case to answer. They were exhaustive submissions attacking the prosecution case. The counsel submitted accused had no case to answer and should thus be acquitted.
Mr. Okemwa for the prosecution opposed the request. According to him the prosecution had established a prima facie case that justified the accused being put on his defence.
I have considered the evidence on record, part of which was recorded by my predecessor Justice Mutuku. I have also considered the submissions by counsel for the defence and counsel for the prosecution.
In my view, the evidence on record established a prima facie case against the accused. A prima facie case is one where a court directing its mind to the evidence on record, may convict. I thus find that the accused should be put on her defence.
Consequently I order that the accused herein be and is hereby put on her defence and will proceed to explain to her the alternatives available to her in law.
Dated and delivered at Garissa this 22nd April, 2015
GEORGE DULU
JUDGE