[2021] KEHC 1830 (KLR)
Upon consideration of the evidence adduced by the prosecution, including the testimony of seven witnesses, the court found that a prima facie case had been established against the accused, John Mugendi Nyaga, for the offence of murder. The court applied the standard that a prima facie case exists where the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEHC 1830 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: John Mugendi Nyaga
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Embu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 6 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer After Close of Prosecution Case
- Outcome
- accused put on his defence
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Prima Facie Case, Criminal Procedure, 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
John Mugendi Nyaga
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer After Close of Prosecution Case
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 adduced by the prosecution is sufficient for the court to return a guilty verdict if no other explanation is offered by the accused.
Ratio Decidendi
Upon consideration of the evidence adduced by the prosecution, including the testimony of seven witnesses, the court found that a prima facie case had been established against the accused, John Mugendi Nyaga, for the offence of murder. The court applied the standard that a prima facie case exists where the prosecution's evidence is sufficient for a conviction if uncontroverted. The court relied on Section 211 and Section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, as well as relevant case law, to determine that the accused should be put on his defence. The court did not provide detailed reasons, in line with the principle that such reasons are only necessary if the accused is acquitted at this...
Court Disposition
accused put on his defence
Orders
- The accused person, John Mugendi Nyaga, is hereby placed on his defence.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT EMBU
CRIMINAL CASE NO.6OF 2019
REPUBLIC..........................................................................................PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
JOHN MUGENDI NYAGA........................................................................ACCUSED
RULING
1. The accused person was charged with the offence of murder contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code. The particulars of the offence being that, on the 14th day of January 2019 at Kiandari village, Embu North Sub County, Embu County within Eastern region, murdered Francis Muriithi Nyaga.
2. The accused person was arraigned in court on 12. 03. 2019 and the accused herein pleaded not guilty and a plea of not guilty entered against him.
3. The matter proceeded to full trial and the prosecution called a total of Seven (7) witnesses after which the prosecution closed its case.
4. This court has a duty to make a ruling upon the conclusion of the prosecution’s case on whether the accused person herein has a case to answer or not. When the evidence of the prosecution’s witnesses has been concluded and the court has formed an opinion that there has not been presented evidence that the accused committed the offence should, after hearing any arguments from either the prosecution or advocate of the accused enter a finding of not guilty. (See Section 306(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code).
5. On the other hand, if the court holds the opinion that the prosecution has established a prima facie case, the court then should proceed to put the accused person on his defence. (See Section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code). At this point, this court’s role is to consider the evidence on record and make a determination whether a prima facie case has been established to warrant the accused person to be put on his defence.
6. Section 211 of the Criminal Procedure Code stipulates that a prima facie case is established where the evidence adduced by the prosecution is sufficient for the court to return a guilty verdict if no other explanation is offered by the accused person. This was the court’s view in the case of Ramanlal Trambaklal Bhatt –vs- R [1957] E.A 332 at 334 and 335).
7. I adopt the holding in the case of Festo Wandera Mukando v Republic [1980] KLR103where the court pronounced itself that there is no need for a reasoned ruling for a case to answer. It’s trite that reasons should only be given where the submission of no case to answer by the accused is upheld and the accused is to be acquitted.
8. This court has considered the evidence adduced by the prosecution in this matter and from its entirety, it is my considered view that the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the accused person herein.
9. I therefore order that the accused person be placed on his defence.
Delivered, datedandsignedatEmbuthis17thday of November, 2021.
L. NJUGUNA
JUDGE
.............................................for the Accused
......................................for the Respondent