[2014] KEHC 504 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution's evidence, including eyewitness testimony of the accused's quarrels with the deceased, the circumstances of the deceased's injuries, the accused's disappearance after the incident, and the medical evidence of cause of death, was sufficient to establish a prima facie case against...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] KEHC 504 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: John Mbuthia Njenga
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 72 of 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer
- Outcome
- Accused put on his defence; case to proceed to defence hearing.
- Judges
- CC Kipkorir
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Burden of Proof, Prima Facie Case, Homicide, 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
John Mbuthia Njenga
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 to warrant putting him on his defence.
- 2 Whether the evidence presented links the accused to the death of the deceased.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution's evidence, including eyewitness testimony of the accused's quarrels with the deceased, the circumstances of the deceased's injuries, the accused's disappearance after the incident, and the medical evidence of cause of death, was sufficient to establish a prima facie case against the accused. The court concluded that the accused must be put on his defence to answer the charge of murder, as the evidence presented could support a conviction if uncontradicted.
Court Disposition
Accused put on his defence; case to proceed to defence hearing.
Orders
- The accused is found to have a case to answer and is accordingly put on his defence.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CRIMINAL CASE NO.72 OF 2011
REPUBLIC….………...………………………………..PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
JOHN MBUTHIA NJENGA…..….…..........…………………..ACCUSED
RULING
The accused John Mbuthia Njenga is charged with the murder of one Elizabeth Njoki Gichuhi. He is alleged to have committed the offence on 27th May, 2011 at Waithaka in Dagoretti within Nairobi County.
The deceased and the accused were said to be in an intimate relationship. According to the accused’s neighbours in Jerusalem estate in Dagoretti, the deceased used to visit the accused frequently. It is the prosecution’s case that the accused fatally assaulted the deceased on the fateful day as they were together at the accused’s house. PW3 (the deceased’s neighbour) testified that the couple used to quarrel whenever they were drunk and that on the fateful night, she heard noises from the accused’s house and in the morning she learnt that the deceased had been badly assaulted. She found her lying naked on the floor and not talking. She assisted PW1 to take the deceased to hospital.
PW1 (the deceased’s daughter) testified that on 27th May, 2011 she was informed that her mother had been assaulted by the accused and on going to the accused’s house, she found her mother in a bad state. In her testimony the accused pretended that he was going to get a taxi to take her mother to hospital but he never came back prompting PW1 to get alternative means. A relative PW2 assisted PW1 in getting a taxi and taking the deceased to Kenyatta National Hospital from where she was pronounced dead at 7p.m.
PW6 (a pathologist) performed the post mortem on the deceased and found that the cause of death was bleeding in the brain caused by severe head injury due to blunt force trauma. PW5 (arresting officer) and PW7 (investigating officer) testified that the accused disappeared soon after the incident in May 2011 and was only arrested in September 2011 after he was sighted in Ngong.
I have analysed the testimony of the prosecution witnesses outlined above. I have also considered the submissions filed by both parties. I have come to the finding that the accused has a case to answer. He is accordingly put on his defence.
Orders accordingly.
Ruling delivered, dated and signedat Nairobi this27thday of November, 2014
R. LAGAT - KORIR
JUDGE
In the presence of:
…………………………….: Court clerk
……………………………: Accused
……………………………: For accused
……………………………: For the State