https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/7633

Republic v Imbusi (Criminal Case E027 of 2022) [2026] KEHC 7633 (KLR) (22 May 2026) (Judgment) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 7633 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the High Court at Nakuru Criminal Case E027 of 2022 SM Mohochi, J May 22, 2026 Between Republic Prosecution and Faith Shalin Imbusi Accused Judgment 1.The accused Faith Shalin Imbusi was charged with the offence of murder contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code. The particulars are, that on the on the 19th Day of February 2022 at Fibers Estate Kiratina Area of Nakuru East Sub-County within Nakuru County, murdered Shantel Anakea. 2.The accused pleaded not guilty to the offence preferred against her. The prosecution presented seven (7) Witnesses and presented no exhibits in support of its case. Prosecution’s Case 3.PW1 Jackline a Social Worker at Goodhope Children Trust in Kiserian Kajiado County testified that from October 2021 the Child Protection Center in Bondeni and it was brought to her attention of a child in need of protection and care who had physical injuries and the child was in Nakuru Central Police Station. She proceeded to the station accompanied by a colleague and driver. Upon arrival was informed that they (the police) had identified a children’s home. That the minor was Shantel Anakea 4 years old. She had bruises and face was swollen on the right side. The witness never saw minor’s parents. 4.That the witness then worked for a children organization and the officers had already found a home to Kiamunyi and only required transport. That she and the driver took the child to the home. 5.That in December 2021 while at the Child Protection Center, they got client who had been sent to be determined and assessed for adoption. Her name was Sharleen Imbusi who was mother to Shantel Anekea the minor who we had taken to Quality Kids Children Orphanage to Kiambu in October. 6.That the client participated for Counselling Sessions more than one month and later in February 2022 she was given the minor and before that, there had a home visit which she undertook and established that the habitation was fit. 7.After getting the minor, she was under supervision and the witness would receive her every 2 weeks then hand over to her colleagues. That when the witness would conduct home visit accused was alone but she indicated she lived there with husband who was away. 8.That the accused had minor taken away in October as the accused was suspected on instigating the injuries. 9.That the accused was handed the minor in February and on April 29th 2022, the witness received a call from Sharleen (accused) she sounded stressed and informed me “Shantel ametuacha”. She inquired further and was told the child was dead and the accused asked her to go there of which she went the next morning and found other relative in her house. 10.The witness inquired from accused on the cause of death and the accused explained that on the 19th the accused was asleep she was in the bedroom and the child was in the sitting room when the child called the accused saying she was having ‘kizunguzugu’ then the accused heard a bang fall, responding found child unconscious, she poured water in vain, took her to a nearby clinic but found it locked. 11.That the accused took child to the sub-county hospital where the child was pronounced dead and her body was transferred to the mortuary. That, the accused was accompanied by unnamed friend to the hospital. That the witness was not told if husband was with them. She consulted Sub-County Children Officer who advised she report the incident at Teachers Police Station where they were referred to Central Police Station Nakuru where they were assigned an officer then went to the Nakuru P.G.H. and saw the body. 12.The body of the child was with a swollen head, eye swollen, bruises on the side of the face swollen. Bruises on the buttocks. She recorded her statement with the police and the next day she accompanied a police officer to the home of Shalin who was arrested with her husband. That Shalin (accused) is before court in the dock. 13.In cross-examination the witness denied identifying the accused from her office. That it was Faith(Shalin) who was brought. That the probation not was requesting for few sessions to be able to get back her child. She was unsure if she had been charged but thought she had been charged. 14.That normally they receive cases that are in courts or cases directly from Probation Department. That she was aware she had a case of a child under care and protection and she was the suspect. That Shalin was reporting to her officer every 2 weeks as per their own procedures as recommended by Children Officer. That during supervision the child had no injuries. 15.That may be (Quality Kids) can respond if the child had a medical exam when being taken under care and protection. There was no prior written report of injuries on the child. The accused had disclosed to her that she was expectant by the time the child (deceased) died. 16.She never knew if the injuries of the body of the deceased were caused by the fall and never witnessed the death when she recorded her statement and she was not the investigator. 17.PW2 Sharon Chepchirchir Cherono a social worker at QK Children’s Home at Kiamunyi recalled that, on 19th October, 2021 she received a 3-year-old Shantel from Children Officer Nakuru West, the kid had been beaten and they were to offer refuge. The child had fresh wounds on the face. 18.After 3 months the mother requested to go and enroll the kid to school and they returned the baby to the Children Office Department on 4th February, 2022. 19.During the stay of the kid at QK she was fine. Later they got information that Shantel was dead and she was requested to record her statement. 20.She knew the mother to the deceased who is present in court. She met the accused three weeks after they had Shantel in their custody (QK) as they took her to reconnect with accused almost 8 times. She identified accused in Court as the mother of Shantel. 21.In cross examination she confirmed working at QK Children’s home as a qualified Social Worker and Counsellor. That she spoke with Shantel but she was recuse. That she was with the child and nobody else and the facility is for children. That when the kid was brought, she had fresh wounds on the face and they received the kid and were told there was an assault case. She never knew the case number. 22.That the protection offered to the child was for temporary stay and was brought by officer she did admission upon arrival. The child comes with a note from the Children Department. The child was brought with pain killers that she was being given and she could express herself that she was beaten by the mother. 23.That the counsellor at the Children Department had a report. And she prepared hers virtually but never presented the same to court. 24.PW3 Caroline Awino a domestic house worker testified knowing the accused who was her neighbor at Faibas staying at front-row and her in rear-row. The witness knew deceased Shantel who was daughter of accused. 25.She recalled on 19th April 2022 she was at house in morning, woke up and went to the accused at 8a.m. and was calling the accused who was unresponsive and she left and returned at 10.00a.m. when accused responded and she asked why accused was oversleeping was told by the accused to rush to the door and she went in and found accused carrying the baby, there was water in basin the child was unresponsive and witness was told that the child took tea and fainted. The child was naked and disoriented and responsive from afar the witness never saw any visible injuries and she assisted accused to take the child to the hospital “Linda Mama Afya” at Wachege Kiratina witness could not recall name of the clinic. 26.Upon arrival which was 500 meters away, the doctor examined the child and recommended she be taken to P.G.H. but the accused said they go to Free Area instead of PGH to get assistance. 27.That in Free Area at a hospital the witness remained at the gate, doctor came and asked if she had escorted the accused which she responded in the affirmative. That the child had already died enroute. That she never knew what caused the death. 28.In cross-examination she admitted the accused was her neighbor having known her for 3 months and she found her assisting the child. That she never saw any injuries on child and the accused was sprinkling water on the child to regain conscious. That the Child was unconscious. And that the accused was then pregnant and she was thus assisting her. That the doctor pronounced child dead upon arrival. And that all along before they got to Free Area the child was alive. 29.PW4: Edwin Korir Kibor Clinical officer Alvin Medical Center, Lanet, recalled on 19th April, 2022 he was on duty and a child was brought with a history of loss of consciousness. He took details of child Shantel Anneke 4 years old brought by the mother whose name he could not remember. 30.That, the main complaint was unconsciousness and same time had depressed skull fracture of which they did not have x-ray and they referred patient to PGH for further management. 31.He observed a depressed skull at the back of the skull and prepared a referral letter which he signed and had it in court. He gave the original referral to the mother and confirm his to be a copy. Referral letter dated 19th April, 2022 was produced as Exh. 1. 32.In cross-examination the witness confirmed he was carrying his I.D. and still worked at the same place and that he had not carried his licence which he could produce if required. That he did a visual observation of the patient. He never administered anything but recommended x-ray. That he made impression of possible head injury from fall from table. That this could be a case of a fall. 33.PW5 Rahab Wairimu Wamuyu, a Clinical officer working at Lanet Health Center recalled being on duty on 19th April, 2022 whereby a girl who was already dead was brought to her at around 11p.m. The child Shannel Annekea was aged 5 years old she never took details of mother. That the Child was brought in dead, her examination was to confirm: she made the following observation;i.No chest movement on examinationii.Extremities were coldiii.Pupils dilated 34.She diagnosed dead body and referred to mortuary through chief’s office. She gave mother original patient card and certify she prepared the same. The witness produced certified copy of patient card as Exh. 2. 35.In cross-examination she denied having been asked to produce her ID or letter of employment. That this was date she was to appear in court on 7th May, 2024 as a witness. And that, all dates are when she was to come to court, that apart from her report there were no other observation. 36.PW6 Dr. John Biketi medical practitioner had a postmortem report in respect to Shantell Anakea done on 29th April, 2022 at Nakuru Referral and Teaching Hospital with the following findings:External Examination -Body covered with blanket. -Female with plaited hair, African. 100cm long. -Rigor mortis and embalmed. -There was posturing of body bluish discoloration of finger nails (hands and toes) -Defence wounds and bruises on the right outer elbow bruises. -There was a linear laceration and bruising outer part of hip all way to knee joint. There was an old scar on gluteal region. -They examined face with multiple laceration, eye chins, left chin, forehead scars. Bruises on chest below breast. Bruises on skull. Internal Exam -Head grossly swollen. -Massive scalp hematoma all head. -Opened brain had contusion. -Blood vessels in brain were congested. 37.In conclusion he made impression of severe head injury, blunt force trauma to head, massive bleeding, cerebral contusion and he produced the postmortem report dated 4th May, 2022 produced as Exhibit 3. 38.In cross examination the doctor admitted he found rigor motis and embalmment. There is no indication of time of death following embalming. That time affects the body. And during postmortem, they had 2 officers from DCI he could not recall their names whose names were not in his report. 39.That usually for a face especially, on head injury from a fall, point of contact cannot be the entire head. And usually most patients fall while facing up and injuries will be on the back. That the injuries were from a height. 40.That if one falls on ground are you falling on concrete the correct will depend on characteristics and also height at the fall. That he never visited scene and was unable to determine age of injury (old) owing to embalming. 41.In reexamination the witness clarified that for a normal human reflex, defence injuries occurs on the hands. It could happen on outer part of elbow shoulder. In this case was on outer part of elbow and left wrist. Such injuries cannot be sustained in an epileptic attack. 42.PW7 No.240516 Inspector Samson Tanui DCI was working at Nakuru East DCI before being transferred to Tetu and later KPLC was investigating officer in this case. 43.He recalled that, on 21st January, 2022 in company of officer David Kipkoros they were informed by Mr. Benson Mutie the DCIO Nakuru East of a reported case of suspected murder at Nakuru Central Police Station instructed to take over the investigation. 44.On commencing investigation, they established that on19th April, 2022 a social worker who works at Child Protection Unit Bondeni had reported a case at Central Police on 20th April 2022. That she had received a phone call from one Faith Imbuzi (accused) that her child now deceased had fallen sick and died. 45.They further established that the said accused had been placed under the supervisor of said social worker by the Nakuru Probation and Children Services in case of cruelty to a child, where accused had been charged in October 2021 with offence of cruelty to child in Nakuru PCR 241/21 and Court file E043 OF 2021.The facts were that the accused had assaulted her deceased daughter One Chantelle Anakea. They further established the victim was placed in safe custody to Quality Kids Center Kiamunyi and accused was placed on 2 years probation under supervisions and guidance at the same facility. 46.They further established that the victim was reintegrated with accused and they lived with one Joseph Maina who is not biological father of victim. 47.That on the 19th April, 2022 the said husband Joseph Maina stated he left for work in morning leaving accused and deceased child while they were all ok. 48.The said Maina stated that while at his place of work at 10.00a.m. receive a call from accused informing him the child has fallen sick. Maina sent money to accused for child to receive medical attention. 49.That one of accused person and neighbor Caroline Awino stated while passing by the accused home, she was called in by accused and informed child was sick, requesting her to accompany her to hospital. 50.Both ladies rushed child to a clinic within Kiratina, where a clinical officer Mr. Kibor upon examining the child who was then unresponsive found her to have a depressed skull injuries and referred them to further medical attention. 51.That the accused in company of her neighbor took child to Lanet dispensary where on arrival the nurses certified the child as dead-on arrival. 52.That the nurse contacted Maina informing him to report at Lanet, after a while he arrived and was directed to get a chief’s letter to enable to transport body to mortuary. Maina obtained letter from area chief and reported matter to Nakuru Show Ground Police Post and body escorted to Nakuru Level 5 mortuary. 53.Upon inquiry from accused she stated that in morning of 19th April, 2022 at 7.00a.m. the victim was taking tea at sitting room and heard victim informing her she was feeling dizzy and heard someone falling in sitting room. She responded and found child lying on the ground. 54.That when they visited Nakuru Level V mortuary 21st April, 2022, they found the deceased had bruises on left eye sight, swelling on head. Bruises on the buttocks. Owing to the circumstances and inconsistency of statement of accused. Both accused and her husband were arrested in connection to death of said child. 55.That on 19th April, 2022 a postmortem was conducted at Nakuru Level V by Dr. Biketi where he established that victim had suffered multiple blunt force trauma to head and had defensive wounds on wrist and elbows. The doctors concluded that cause of death was as a result of severe head injury from multiple blunt force trauma to the head. The witness was present when postmortem was conducted, he was able to observe the injuries. 56.That there were injuries on head and fractured skull. The head was swollen and upon postmortem one could see. 57.Upon conclusion of postmortem and owing to the evidence at hand including the history of assault by accused and inconsistency of accused being the only person who remained with victim that morning he concluded and forwarded file to ODPP recommending charges for murder. That Joseph Maina who they had arrested together with accused was set free. 58.Upon perusal and recommendation of DPP the accused is now charged. 59.That there was history of assault by the accused and he produced copies of the charge sheet in Nakuru Criminal Case No.241 of 2021 as Exh. No.4 and Court file No.E043 of 2021certified proceedings as Exh. No.5. 60.The charges were cruelly to a charge contrary to Section 127 (1) (a) Children’s Act and the Accused was the accused before court and victim was Chantell Anakea now deceased. The accused entered plea of guilty and she was sentence to 2 years’ probation. 61.That he was also able to obtain an admission form from Quality Kids Children’s Home admitted on 19th October, 2021 Admission form produced as Exh. No.6 with the following observation. General condition - Fresh wounds on face marks on the body. 62.Circumstance of admission - rescued from mother because she was so abusive. Upon supervision and guidance by social worker, the accused applied to be integrated with deceased claiming she could take care of her. 63.He followed up on the reintegration reason and obtained form from state department social protection directorate of children’s services; it’s a mutual agreement dated 4th February, 2022 Ref. 964/22 produced as Exh. 7, where title is parental agreement between accused and the children’s home subject was 4 years Chantelle Read No.2.The subject to be handed over from the home to the mother on 4th February, 2022 and promise to love and care for subject failure of which legal action would be taken signed by parties. 64.Produced a copy of the probation order as Exh.8. which observed:Conclude mother and child were bonding well. At time of death the deceased and accused had completed 4 counselling sessions remaining 2. 65.In cross examination the witness admitted that the documents all relate to the Criminal Case E043 of 2021. That based recommendation to charge on other circumstances. That on 21st April, 2022 he visited the house. 66.That they could not have acquired any other evidence no photos or sketches. That he recorded statement of Carol Awino a recipient of information from accused as to what she was told and what she did. That the child was alive and unresponsive and there was no indication of assault from Carol Awino’s statement. 67.He admitted it is possible that child can fall and hit her head but injuries would not be commensurate. That Accused was expectant when incident occurred. 68.That he investigated on child’s health from husband and that apart from assault reports, postmortem of child he never had any other medical report and that postmortem was relied upon assessment report by Kibor a clinical officer. 69.At Lanet they could not have medical report as victim was certified dead-on arrival. Injuries were recent at the time of postmortem as per the postmortem report. 70.The facts of investigations disproved the accused testimony given result of postmortem. That negated the theory of falling down and that the basis of charge is cruelty to the child were, plea of guilty. 71.He refuted that with accused having undergone the counselling they believed accused had changed. That accused entered into an agreement to have her child. There was no way he could ascertain if they did administer first aid. 72.That the incident occurred on 19th April, 2022 where neighbors stated that they tried to administer first aid on victim. He further clarified that the injuries on postmortem were inconsistent with a fall theory. If they were consistent with a fall they were located on central part of skull. Bruising on the buttock. Defence Case 73.DW1 Faith Shirleen Injusi 26 years old married and had 2 children but one is deceased. That in April 2022 she was living in Fibres estate, Nakuru and was expectant at 8 months. 74.She was performing manual jobs like washing cloths and taking care of child whom she started living with on 4th February, 2022. The child was in a children’s home as she had been charged with child neglect and had nobody to live with and police took child to children’s home. 75.The child neglect charges were in 2021 and she was sentenced to a probation and counseling while child was ordered to children’s home until a family member can pick him. After her counselling session she went back to collect her child from children’s office, when child came, she was unwell vomiting, she took him to hospital and children officer. Medication was administered and visits scheduled. 76.That on 19th February, 2022 she woke up at 7 a.m. prepared breakfast, her husband went to work and she went back to bed. 77.Child woke up she served him breakfast and went back to bed. Child called her and she went to sitting room and found the child had collapsed on floor called child who was unresponsive, requested for assistance a neighbour (Caroline) passing to take to hospital. That Caroline Awinno assisted in taking child to the Alvin Hospital. Child was taken to emergency where they suggested we go to PGH for x-ray. We went to Lanet dispensary where she attended clinic and they never had money. The doctor examined child and took him to emergency room before declaring child dead. 78.Later police came how investigating and wanted to know where child fell down. 79.In cross examination the witness admitted to having 2 children: Shantel Nalikia – 4 years Grace Mbond – 3.5 years 80.That she showed police where deceased fell and that it was only her and deceased in the house. He had fallen on floor facing up. She admitted having been charged with child abused and neglect pleaded guilty and she had beaten the deceased in 2021. That she was born on 15th October, 2017 and that she had not beaten him badly, she pleaded guilty to the charges as she had gone to work at a flower farm. Public took child to police station she went at 9a.m. and returned at 1.00p.m told deceased to do home-work and she refused. She attended Royal Academy in Kiratina. She was to write from (1 – 10): That the child neglect charges were first and for assaulting it was the 1st time and she was counselled. That the deceased father is unknown as she conceived while in school and her husband is father to remaining child but he loved the deceased as his own and that she loved the deceased and only beat her once. She denied knowing what killed the child admitted that Doctor found head injuries and that a 4 year old is not tall. That it was not his 1st fall he used to fall and she took him to Lanet Dispensary. She denied knowledge as to how the deceased got “defence injuries.” She never knew the complainant in the 1st case and only found child at police station. 81.She further clarified that at the station she was not represented by an advocate and was only urged to admit to the child neglect charges. she was only disciplining the child never saw the psychological counseling report. Analysis and Determination 82.The prosecution’s case was predicated on circumstantial evidence as nobody saw the accused assaulting the deceased but she had a child cruelty conviction and was serving a probationary term of two years, her account of the events on the fateful day were inconsistent with the scientific evidence that revealed massive head injuries and defence injuries on the body of the child. The fact of death is undisputed. 83.It is beyond doubt the deceased death was caused by an unlawful act or omission, Article 26 (1) of the Constitution guarantees every person, the right to life. PW6 conducted the post mortem and prepared a report wherein he formed the opinion that the cause of death was of severe head injury, blunt force trauma to head, massive bleeding, cerebral contusion. From the evidence adduced herein, this court notes that there was no lawful basis for the aforementioned death. In the circumstances therefore, the court finds that indeed the deceased’s death was unlawfully caused. 84.The question that begs is whether circumstantially the fatal injuries were occasioned upon the deceased by the accused. 85.The principles guiding the finding of guilt on circumstantial evidence as espoused in the cases of R v Kipkering Arap Koskei [1949] EACA 135; Sawe v R [2003] KLR 304; and R v Taylor Weaver & Donovani [1928] 21 Cr Appr 205, were satisfied and that“there existed inculpatory facts that were incompatible with the innocence of the appellant and incapable of any explanation upon other reasonable hypothesis other than that of guilt”. 86.The Court of Appeal in the case of Pon v Republic (2019) eKLR stated that when faced with circumstantial evidence, a court should consider the following;“Though not direct, circumstantial evidence, as this Court stated in Musili Tulo v Republic Criminal Appeal No 30 of 2013:-“... is as good as any evidence if it is properly evaluated and, as is usually put, it can prove a case with the accuracy of mathematics.”To base a conviction entirely or substantially upon circumstantial evidence, it is necessary that guilt of the suspect should not only be rational inference but also it should be the only rational inference that could be drawn from the circumstances. If there is any reasonable possibility consistent with innocence, it is the duty of the court to find the suspect not guilty. This principle has been applied for years in this jurisdiction and the two leading judicial authorities that have stood the test of time are Rex v Kipkerring Arap Koske & 2 Others [1949] EACA 135 and Simoni Musoke v R [1958] EA 71. ………….……… It is settled law that when a case rests on entirely circumstantial evidence, such evidence must satisfy three tests:-i.the circumstances from which an inference of guilty is to be drawn, must be cogently and firmly established;ii.those circumstances should be of a definite tendency unerringly pointing towards guilt of the accused;(iii)the circumstances taken cumulatively should form a chain so complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that within all human probability the crime was committed by the accused and none else” 87.The extent of injuries inflicted upon the 4 year old child were massive in nature, she suffered a complete smashed skull that would be inconsistent with a fall either while the deceased was standing or from a table. The deceased is alleged to have taken tea then fell and it is not alleged she fell from an elevation. The alleged fall to lay facing upwards, is inconsistent to a fall by a living being as testified by PW6 and the defence injuries including extensive abrasion stretching from the elbow downwards to the hip is indicative of being dragged and could not have obtained from a fall. 88.Further circumstantial evidence of avoiding to take the child to PGH even after the initial visual examination revealed a smashed skull is indicative of the accused attempting to evade accountability bearing in mind she had a few months earlier admitted to brutalizing the child and was convicted to serve a probationary term. 89.From that evidence, I am persuaded that the accused person is the one who inflicted the injuries that caused the death of the deceased. 90.In the case of Bonaya Tutut Ipu and Another vs R, [2015] eKLR the Court cited with approval the persuasive authority of the Ugandan Court of Appeal case of Chesakit vs UG, Criminal Appeal 95 of 2004 where the court held:“In determining a charge of murder whether malice aforethought has been proved, the court must take into account factors such as the part of the body injured, the type of weapon used if any, the type of injuries inflicted upon the deceased and the subsequent conduct of the accused person.” 91.Furthermore in the cases of Katana vs Republic (Criminal Appeal 48 of 2021 ) [2024] KECA 463 (KLR); and Ali Salim Bahat & another vs Republic [2019] eKLR this Court observed that:“…their vicious attack on the deceased was also a clear indication that they intended the consequences of their actions, that is, the death of the deceased Equally, it established malice aforethought on the part of the appellants” 92.The Circumstantial evidence of previous cruelty of the accused upon the deceased, the magnitude and seriousness of the injuries inflicted establishes the malice aforethought and that the postmortem findings on the body of the deceased is indicative of the depth of violence the deceased suffered at the hands of the assailant. 93.This court finds the Appellant’s defence as uncorroborated, weak and a belated attempt to try divert the court’s attention to an imaginary fall and that the initial indication that the child was sick requiring medical attention cannot be equated to an injured child requiring medical attention. 94.In totality, having considered the evidence adduced in this case it is my finding that the prosecution has proved its case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. I find the accused Faith Shalin Imbusi, guilty of the offence of murder contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code and is hereby convicted accordingly. 95.A pre-sentence report and a victim impact report shall be prepared and served to enable mitigation and sentencing. 96.Mitigation and sentencing shall be 30 days from today. It is so ordered. DELIVERED VIRTUALLY ON THE TEAMS PLATFORM ON THIS 22ND DAY OF MAY 2026MOHOCHI S.MJUDGE