[2017] KEHC 8804 (KLR)
The court, after reviewing the evidence of the five prosecution witnesses and applying the principles from Bhatt v Republic [1957] EA 332, found that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against both accused persons. The evidence presented was sufficient to require the accused to be placed on their...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEHC 8804 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: John Obielo Itaka; Defendant: Aston Mbuta Itaka
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kakamega
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 1 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer at Close of Prosecution Case
- Outcome
- Both accused persons found to have a case to answer and placed on their defence.
- Judges
- AT Sitati
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Prima Facie Case, Burden of Proof, 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 Obielo Itaka
Defendant
Aston Mbuta Itaka
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer at Close of Prosecution Case
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the accused persons to require them to be placed on their defence.
- 2 Whether the evidence adduced by the prosecution meets the threshold set out in law for a case to answer.
Ratio Decidendi
The court, after reviewing the evidence of the five prosecution witnesses and applying the principles from Bhatt v Republic [1957] EA 332, found that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against both accused persons. The evidence presented was sufficient to require the accused to be placed on their defence, as a reasonable tribunal could convict on the basis of the prosecution's case if no explanation was offered by the accused. The court therefore ruled that both accused persons must be put on their defence in accordance with the law.
Court Disposition
Both accused persons found to have a case to answer and placed on their defence.
Orders
- Both accused persons are placed on their defence and may indicate how they wish to proceed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KAKAMEGA
CRIMINAL DIVISION
CRIMINAL CASE (MURDER) No.1 of 2014
REPUBLIC………………………….....…........PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
JOHN OBIELO ITAKA………………….......…1ST ACCUSED
ASTON MBUTA ITAKA……………….......…..2ND ACCUSED
R U L I N G
Introduction
1. The two accused persons are charged with the offence of murder contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code, Cap 63 Laws of Kenya, the particulars being that on the 8th day of November, 2013 at Shidodo Sub-Location in Kakamega East District within Kakamega County jointly with another not before court, murdered Josepha Mkabwa Shabwila. Both accused denied committing the offence.
2. The prosecution called 5 witnesses in an attempt to prove the allegations against the two accused persons. At the close of the prosecution case, both counsel left the matter to the court to determine whether or not the accused persons have a case to answer.
3. After carefully reading through the evidence of the five prosecution witnesses, and applying the principles’ enunciated by the court in the case of Bhatt – Vs _ Republic [1957] EA 332, I am satisfied that the prosecution has established a prima facie case requiring both accused persons to be placed on their defence, and I proceed to place them on their defence.
4. The accused may give sworn or unsworn evidence or alternatively they are at liberty to remain silent and let the court decide the case on the evidence that is before it. If they give sworn evidence, thy may be asked questions both by the prosecution and the court. If thy elect to give unsworn testimony, they will not be asked any questions. In each case, they are free to call witnesses.
5. The accused may now indicate to the court how they intend to proceed with their defence.
Orders accordingly
Ruling delivered dated and signed in open court this 10th day of May 2017
RUTH N. SITATI
JUDGE
In the presence of:-
Mr. Onsando Holding brief for Elung’ata..….....For Accused
Mr. Juma…………………..…………………...….For state
Polycap………………………….……………...…Court Assistant