[2017] KEHC 2610 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against the accused, Joseph Onyango Ochieng, by presenting evidence that placed him at the scene of the crime and connected him to the circumstances of the deceased's death. Applying the legal standard for a ruling on a case to answer, the court...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEHC 2610 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Respondent: Joseph Onyango Ochieng
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 44 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer
- Outcome
- accused put on his defence
- Judges
- J Wakiaga
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Prima Facie Case, Burden of Proof, Case to Answer
- 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
Joseph Onyango Ochieng
Respondent
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 by the prosecution is sufficient to require the accused to answer to the charge of murder.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against the accused, Joseph Onyango Ochieng, by presenting evidence that placed him at the scene of the crime and connected him to the circumstances of the deceased's death. Applying the legal standard for a ruling on a case to answer, the court held that it was not required at this stage to determine guilt, but only to assess whether there was sufficient evidence to require the accused to respond. The court relied on established principles that a detailed analysis of the evidence is not appropriate at this stage and that suspicion alone is insufficient for conviction. Consequently, the court ruled that the accused...
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
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 44 OF 2014
REPUBLIC....................................................................................................PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
JOSEPH ONYANGO OCHIENG ………………………………….…………..ACCUSED
RULING
1. The accused JOSEPH ONYANGO OCHIENG was charged with the offence of murder contrary to Section 203as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code the particulars of which were that on the 18th day of May, 2014 at Dandora Phase IV in Njiru District of Nairobi County murdered one BENSON OLUOCH NYAMBUTE.
2. He pleaded not guilty and to prove its case against him the prosecution called a total of eight (8) witnesses and at the close of the prosecution case it was submitted on behalf of the accused that the prosecution case was merely based on suspicion which however strong cannot be a basis for the conviction of an accused person. It was submitted that should the accused choose to keep quiet the court might not be able to convict on the evidence on record. Case of SAWE v REPUBLIC was submitted.
3. On behalf of the prosecution it was submitted that there was a fight between the accused and the deceased and that the accused was the last person to be seen with the deceased having been put at the scene of death of the deceased.
4. In the case of REPUBLIC v SAMWEL KARANJA KURIA CRIMINAL CASE NO. 130 OF 2004 Nairobi (2009) eKLR Justice J.B Ojwang (as he then was) set out what to be considered at this stage in the following terms:-
“The question at this stage is not whether or not the accused is guilty as charged but whether there is such cogent evidence of his connection with the circumstances in which the killing of the deceased occurred, that the concept of prima facie case dictates as a matter of law that an opportunity be created by this court for the accused to state his own case regarding the killing. The governing law on this point is well settled”………
In the Court of Appeal No. 77 of 2006 the Court of Appeal expressed that too detailed analysis of the evidence, at no case to answer stage is undesirable if the court is going to put the accused onto his defence as too much details in the trial court’s ruling could then compromise the evidentiary quality of the defence to be mounted.”
5. With this principal in mind I take into account the prosecution evidence and find and hold that a prima facie case has been established by the prosecution to enable me put the accused on his defence which I hereby do. The accused is therefore advised of his rights under Section 306 of Criminal Procedure Code.
DATED, DELIVERED and SIGNED at Nairobi this 5th day of October, 2017.
…………………………………
J. WAKIAGA
JUDGE
In the presence of:-
Mr. Meroka for the State
Mr. Shimaka for the Accused
Accused person present
Court clerk Tabitha