[2023] KEHC 3470 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution had adduced sufficient evidence, including medical and eyewitness testimony, to establish that the deceased died as a result of unlawful acts and that there was evidence connecting the accused persons to the death. Applying the standard for a prima facie case as set out in...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEHC 3470 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Simon Kariuki; Defendant: James Kinyua Mwangi; Defendant: Alex Akosa Saina alias Aleki; Defendant: Fredrick Risa Kosen alias Freddy
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Narok
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 35 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer
- Outcome
- Accused persons found to have a case to answer and put on their defense.
- Judges
- F Gikonyo
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Prima Facie Case, Case to Answer, Burden of Proof, Criminal Procedure, Constitutional Rights
- 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 Kariuki
Defendant
James Kinyua Mwangi
Defendant
Alex Akosa Saina alias Aleki
Defendant
Fredrick Risa Kosen alias Freddy
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the accused persons to warrant putting them on their defense.
- 2 Whether the evidence adduced links the accused persons to the death of the deceased.
- 3 Whether the accused persons' constitutional rights are preserved at this stage.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution had adduced sufficient evidence, including medical and eyewitness testimony, to establish that the deceased died as a result of unlawful acts and that there was evidence connecting the accused persons to the death. Applying the standard for a prima facie case as set out in Ramanlal Trambaklal Bhatt v Republic, the court held that a reasonable tribunal could convict the accused if no explanation was offered. The court also noted the need to avoid detailed analysis at this stage to preserve the integrity of the defense case. Consequently, the court ruled that a prima facie case had been established and ordered the accused persons to be put on their...
Court Disposition
Accused persons found to have a case to answer and put on their defense.
Orders
- The accused persons are hereby put on their defense to exercise their rights under Section 306(2) and 307 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
- The accused persons are reminded of their constitutional right to remain silent under Article 50 of the Constitution.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
32 paragraphs
Republic v Kariuki & 3 others (Criminal Case 35 of 2017) [2023] KEHC 3470 (KLR) (26 April 2023) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEHC 3470 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Narok
Criminal Case 35 of 2017
F Gikonyo, J
April 26, 2023
Between
Republic
Prosecutor
and
Simon Kariuki
1st Accused
James Kinyua Mwangi
2nd Accused
Alex Akosa Saina alias Aleki
3rd Accused
Fredrick Risa Kosen alias Freddy
4th Accused
Ruling
1. The accused herein is charged with the offence of murder contrary to Section 203 as read Section 204 of the Penal Code. It is alleged that on February 24, 2017 at Narok Town, Narok North Sub-county within Narok County jointly with others not before court murdered one John Mwaniki Munga.
2. All accused persons pleaded not guilty to the charge. To prove the case against them, the prosecution called and examined a total of fifteen (15) witnesses. Some of the witnesses are relatives of the deceased.
3. At this stage of the proceedings, the court is required to establish whether a prima facie case has been made out to put the accused to their defense.
4. According to the case of Ramanlal Trambaklal Bhatt V Republic (1957) EA 332 :-… It may not be easy to define what is meant by prima facie case but at least it must mean one on which a reasonable tribunal properly directing its mind to the law and the evidence could convict if no explanation is offered by the defense.”
5. See also Ojwang J (as he then was) in the case of Republic vs Karanja Kiria Cr Case No 13 of 2004 Nairobi [2009] eKLR that:-“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 . . .The Court of Appeal Criminal Appeal No. 77 of 2006, the Court of Appeal expressed that too detailed analysis of evidence, at no case to answer stage is undesirable if the court is going to put the accused onto his defense as too much details in the trial court’s ruling could then compromise the evidentiary quality of the defense to be mounted.”(Emphasis added).
6. Bearing in mind this limitation, I have carefully considered the evidence and it has been established that the deceased died not of natural causes. See the evidence by PW14 -Dr Mutai Kiplangat Titus who conducted a postmortem at Narok County Referral Hospital on the body of the deceased. He produced post mortem report dated 7/03/2017. It was his evidence that the deceased had several bruises on upper and lower limbs and anterior chest wall, visible injury mark on right side of head ocipito temboral region 2x3 cm, darkened skin, hands appear swollen, bruises on right foot, no secretions noted from mouth nor nostrils, dissection of right arm hands thighs reveal tissue darkening and clots suggesting soft tissue injuries.. He opined that the cause of death was cardiorespiratory arrest secondary to very severe blunt head injury and several soft tissue injuries possibly inflicted by blunt objects homicide death.
7. There was other evidence by prosecution witnesses- PW2- Samwel Njoroge, PW3-Jane Soipei Munga, PW4- Charles Kisairo Nyandika, PW5-Abaraham karanja Ndungu, PW6- Samwel Gathika Maina,and PW11- Mariko Muunka Kahoi- which connected them to the death.
8. Accordingly, prima facie case has been established against the accused persons which warrants them be put on their defense.
9. By reason of the matter stated herein, the accused persons are hereby put on their defense to exercise their rights under Section 306(2) and 307 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
10. The court is also acutely aware of their constitutional right under Article 50 of the Constitution; the right to remain silent.
11. The accused person through the advice of their advocates on record are now called upon, if they so wish, to intimate to the court the manner they wish to defend themselves. Orders accordingly.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT NAROK THROUGH MICROSOFT TEAMS ONLINE APPLICATION THIS 26TH DAY OF APRIL, 2023. F. GIKONYO MJUDGEIn the presence of:1. M/s Nkurunah for 1st and 2nd accused person2. Onduso for 4th accused person3. Onduso h/b for M/s Maritim for 3rd accused person4. M/s Mwaniki for DPP5. Kasaso C/ACourt Assistant – Mr. Kasaso