[2019] KEHC 554 (KLR)
The court found that, despite repeated adjournments and delays due to absent witnesses and missing police files, the prosecution had adduced evidence through three witnesses. Upon reviewing the record and applying the test for a prima facie case as set out in Ramanlal Trambaklal Bhatt vs. R and subsequent...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEHC 554 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Director of Public Prosecutions; Defendant: Joakim Odwor Okal
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kakamega
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 12 of 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer
- Outcome
- Accused found to have a case to answer and put on his defence.
- Judges
- DN Musyoka
- Legal Topics
- Prima Facie Case, Case to Answer, Criminal Trial 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
Director of Public Prosecutions
Applicant
Joakim Odwor Okal
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 sufficient to require him to be put on his defence.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that, despite repeated adjournments and delays due to absent witnesses and missing police files, the prosecution had adduced evidence through three witnesses. Upon reviewing the record and applying the test for a prima facie case as set out in Ramanlal Trambaklal Bhatt vs. R and subsequent authorities, the court was satisfied that the evidence presented was sufficient to establish a prima facie case against the accused. Consequently, the accused was found to have a case to answer and was put on his defence.
Court Disposition
Accused found to have a case to answer and put on his defence.
Orders
- The accused is found to have a case to answer and shall be put on his defence.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
15 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KAKAMEGA
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 12 OF 2015
REPUBLIC...........................DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS
VERSUS
JOAKIM ODWOR OKAL...........................................................ACCUSED
RULING
1. When this matter came up for hearing on 16th October 2019, I declined to allow an application for adjournment by the state, and the state closed its case.
2. The last time the matter proceeded was 9th February 2016, when PW3 testified. PW1 and PW2 had testified on 18th November 2015. Thereafter the matter came up several times, and was adjourned for various reasons. On 10th May 2016, it was because the state witnesses were not in court. On 14th December 2016, it was because the there were no witnesses and the advocate for the accused was absent. On 19th June 2017, the matter could not be reached. On 20th July 2017, there was no police file. On 11th June 2018, the state did not have the police file. On 18th July 2018, again there was no police file and witnesses were not in court. On 21st November 2018, it was the same story, no police file and no witnesses. It was the same story on 5th March 2019 and 21st May 2019
3. I have gone through the record with a view of determining whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case, sufficient to have the accused person put on his defence.
4. I have guidance from Ramanlal Trambaklal Bhatt vs. R (1957) EA 332, where the court describes a prima facie case as one in which a reasonable tribunal, properly directing its mind to the law and the evidence, could convict, if no explanation was offered by the defence. Director of Public Prosecutions vs. Geoffrey Mukonza Mwangangi [2018] eKLR and Frankline Muthoka Mumo vs. Republic [2019] eKLR are in similar vein.
5. I have gone through the record before me, principally the testimonies of PW1, PW2 and PW3, and I am persuaded that the prosecution has adduced evidence which establishes a prima facie case against the accused person, and I hereby find that the accused has a case to answer, and I shall, accordingly, be put him on his defence.
DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED IN OPEN COURT AT KAKAMEGA THIS 29TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019
W. MUSYOKA
JUDGE