[2017] KEHC 9733 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution had adduced sufficient circumstantial evidence to establish a prima facie case against the accused. At this stage, the court is only required to determine whether there is enough evidence to call upon the accused to make a defence, not to decide on the final merits of the case....
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEHC 9733 (KLR)
- Parties
- Respondent: Republic; Defendant: Joseph Maina Nderi
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 92 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer After Close of Prosecution Case
- Outcome
- Accused put on his defence.
- Judges
- J Wakiaga
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Prima Facie Case, Circumstantial Evidence, 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
Respondent
Joseph Maina Nderi
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 to require the accused to be put on his defence.
- 2 Whether the evidence adduced, though circumstantial, is sufficient at this stage to warrant a defence from the accused.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution had adduced sufficient circumstantial evidence to establish a prima facie case against the accused. At this stage, the court is only required to determine whether there is enough evidence to call upon the accused to make a defence, not to decide on the final merits of the case. The court, relying on the principle from REPUBLIC v JAGJIVAN M. PATEL & Others, held that even in a borderline case, if the evidence might possibly sustain a conviction upon full consideration, the accused should be put on his defence. Accordingly, the accused was put on his defence and advised of his rights under Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Court Disposition
Accused put on his defence.
Orders
- The accused is put on his defence under Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
- The accused is advised of his rights.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
MILIMANI LAW COURTS
HIGH COURT CRIMINAL CASE NO 92 OF 2014
REPUBLIC....................................................PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
JOSEPH MAINA NDERI...................................ACCUSED
RULING
1. The accused JOSEPH MAINA NDERI was charged with the offence of murder contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code the particulars of which were that on 28th day of September, 2014 at Kinyanjui Estate Dagoretti District within Nairobi County murdered WILLIAM LITUNYA AMBUNDA.
2. He pleaded not guilty to the said charges and to prove its case against him the prosecution called a total of six (6) witnesses and at the close of the prosecution case whereas the defence made written submissions on whether a prima facie case had been proved against the accused, the prosecution opted not to make any submissions.
3. On behalf of the accused it was submitted that the accused had not been placed at the scene of murder and had not been identified as the one who murdered the deceased.
4. At this stage, the issue is not whether or not the prosecution has established a case against the accused person beyond reasonable doubt but whether a case has been made to justify calling upon the accused person to offer an explanation as was stated in the case of REPUBLIC v JAGJIVAN M. PATEL & Others (1) TLR as follows:-
“All the court has to decide at the close of the evidence in support of the charge is whether a case is made out against the accused just sufficiently to require him to make a defence, it may be a strong case or a weak case. The court is not required at this stage to apply its mind in deciding finally whether the evidence is worthy of credit or whether if believed it is weighty enough to prove the case conclusively beyond reasonable doubt. A ruling that there is a case to answer would be justified in my opinion in a border line case where the court, though not satisfied as to the conclusiveness of the prosecution evidence, is yet of the opinion that the case made out is one which on full consideration might possibly be thought sufficient to sustain a conviction.”
5. From the evidence tendered before the court and without going into details thereof so as not to prejudice the accused defence I am satisfied that there is enough circumstantial evidence tendered by the prosecution to enable the court put the accused on his defence which I hereby do. The accused is therefore advised of his rights under Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
DATED, SIGNED and DELIVERED at Nairobi this 2nd day of November, 2017
.....................
J. WAKIAGA
JUDGE
In the presence of:-
Mrs. Kinoti for the State
Mrs. Nyamongo for the accused
Accused person present
Tabitha court clerk