[2017] KEHC 7861 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution's evidence, taken as a whole, was sufficient and credible to establish a prima facie case against the accused. Applying the standard set out in Bhatt v Republic, the court held that a reasonable tribunal, properly directing itself to the law and the evidence, could convict the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEHC 7861 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Kidron Kiprop Koech
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Eldoret
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 31 of 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer at Close of Prosecution Case
- Outcome
- Accused found to have a case to answer and put on his defence.
- Judges
- CW Githua
- Legal Topics
- Murder Charge, Prima Facie Case, Criminal Procedure, 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
Kidron Kiprop Koech
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer at Close of Prosecution Case
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution established a prima facie case against the accused to warrant putting him on his defence.
- 2 Whether the evidence adduced by the prosecution is sufficient and credible to support the charge of murder at this stage.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution's evidence, taken as a whole, was sufficient and credible to establish a prima facie case against the accused. Applying the standard set out in Bhatt v Republic, the court held that a reasonable tribunal, properly directing itself to the law and the evidence, could convict the accused if no explanation was offered by the defence. Therefore, the accused was found to have a case to answer and was put on his defence under Section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Court Disposition
Accused found to have a case to answer and put on his defence.
Orders
- The accused is put on his defence under Section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
25 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT ELDORET
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 31 OF 2010
REPUBLIC................................................PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
KIDRON KIPROP KOECH..............................ACCUSED
RULING
1. The accused Kidron Kiprop Koech faces a charge of Murder contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code. It is alleged that on the 8th day of April, 2010 after midnight at Nandi Hills township, he murdered Janet Chepkemboi.
2. The accused denied the charges. The trial opened before my sister Hon. Mshila J on 31st January, 2012 who heard a total of seven witnesses. This court took over the proceedings on 13th October, 2014 and the accused elected to have the court continue with the hearing from where Mshila J stopped. I thereafter heard the last two prosecution witnesses.
3. At the close of the prosecution case, learned counsel for the accused Mr. Miyienda chose to make oral submissions under Section 306 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code. Learned prosecuting counsel MsOduor chose not to make any submissions at that stage.
4. In his oral submissions, Mr. Miyienda urged the court to find that a prima facie case had not been established against the accused given the totality of the evidence adduced by the prosecution.
He argued that from PW8’s evidence, the deceased’s cause of death had not been conclusively established and a possibility existed that she was not murdered by the accused but that she could have committed suicide or died from other causes. He also contended that the prosecution relied on contradictory and inadequate evidence. He urged the court to find that the accused does not have a case to answer and acquit him at this stage.
5. I have carefully considered the entire evidence on record and the submissions made by learned counsel Mr. Miyienda. I find that at this stage, the court is only required to satisfy itself whether or not the prosecution had established a prima facie case against the accused which is sufficient to put him on his defence. And a prima facie case is one which a reasonable court properly directing its mind to the law and the evidence before it could convict if no explanation is offered by the defence. See:Bhatt V Republic (1957) E.A 332.
6. Having considered the evidence on record in its totality, I have come
to the conclusion that the evidence adduced by the prosecution in this case is sufficient and credible enough to establish a prima facie case against the accused person. It is therefore my finding that the accused has a case to answer and he is accordingly put on his defence under Section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
It is so ordered.
C.W GITHUA
JUDGE
DATED, SIGNEDandDELIVEREDatELDORETthis 31st day of January 2017
In the presence of:-
The accused
Mr. Miyienda for the accused
Ms. Oduor for the Republic
Mr. Lobolia Court Clerk