[2025] KEHC 5790 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution had adduced sufficient evidence through eight witnesses to establish a prima facie case against the accused for the offence of murder. Guided by the principle in Ramanlal T. Bhatt vs Republic, the court determined that if the accused chose to remain silent, the evidence on record...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEHC 5790 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Simon Njoroge Kariuki
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 4 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer
- Outcome
- Accused put on his defence.
- Judges
- JM Nang'ea
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Prima Facie Case, 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
Simon Njoroge Kariuki
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case to warrant putting the accused on his defence under Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution had adduced sufficient evidence through eight witnesses to establish a prima facie case against the accused for the offence of murder. Guided by the principle in Ramanlal T. Bhatt vs Republic, the court determined that if the accused chose to remain silent, the evidence on record could sustain a conviction. However, this does not mean the court is prepared to convict at this stage, as the defence must still be heard. The court, therefore, ruled that the accused should be put on his defence, in line with established judicial practice that reasons for such a finding are not to be detailed to avoid prejudicing the defence case.
Court Disposition
Accused put on his defence.
Orders
- The accused is hereby put on his defence.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
19 paragraphs
Republic v Kariuki (Criminal Case 4 of 2018) [2025] KEHC 5790 (KLR) (6 May 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 5790 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Nakuru
Criminal Case 4 of 2018
JM Nang'ea, J
May 6, 2025
Between
Republic
Prosecution
and
Simon Njoroge Kariuki
Accused
Ruling
1. The accused is charged with Murder Contary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code. The particulars of the offence state that on 24th November 2017 at Nyathuna area, Nakuru North Sub-County, within Nakuru County he murdered Rachael Wanjiru Mwangi. The accused entered plea of “Not Guilty”.
2. I have perused the evidence adduced by 8 witnesses the prosecution called and note that the defence Counsel chose not to offer Submissons “on no case to answer”. At this stage, the prosecution is required to make out a prima facie case warranting putting of the accused on his defence. In the famous case of Ramanlal T. Bhatt vs Republic, a prima facie case was defined as one in which the court could convict if no defence is offered by the accused. That is not to say, however, that the court will be prepared to convict in every case where the accused fails to give defence. The decision of the court depends on the facts and circumstances of each case while taking into account that the accused has the Constitutional right to remain silent.
3. Having been so guided, I find that the prosecution has made out a prima facie case and the accused is hereby put on his defence. It is established Judicial practice that no reasons ought to be given for such decision so that an impression is not created that the court has already made up its mind before hearing the defence case.
4. Ruling accordingly.
J. M. NANG’EA, JUDGE.RULING DELIVERED THIS 6TH\ DAY OF MAY, 2025.