[2017] KEHC 9500 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against the accused, Kihu Anthony Mbugua, for the offence of murder. The evidence presented, including proof of death and identification of the accused at the scene, was sufficient at this stage to require the accused to be put on his defence....
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEHC 9500 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Kihu Anthony Mbugua
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 18 of 2012
- 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, Burden of Proof, Criminal Procedure
- 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
Kihu Anthony Mbugua
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 by the prosecution is sufficient at this stage to warrant the accused to answer the charge of murder.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against the accused, Kihu Anthony Mbugua, for the offence of murder. The evidence presented, including proof of death and identification of the accused at the scene, was sufficient at this stage to require the accused to be put on his defence. The court emphasized that the threshold at this stage is not proof of guilt beyond reasonable doubt but whether there is enough evidence to call for an explanation from the accused. The court relied on established legal principles that discourage detailed analysis of the evidence at this stage to avoid prejudicing the defence. Consequently, the accused was put on his defence and...
Court Disposition
Accused put on his defence.
Orders
- The accused is put on his defence to answer the charge of murder.
- The accused is advised of his rights under Section 306 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 NAIROBI
MILIMANI LAW COURTS
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 18 OF 2012
REPUBLIC..................................................PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
KIHU ANTHONY MBUGU…………....………..ACCUSED
RULING
1. The accused KIHU ANTHONY MBUGUA 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 night of 9th and 10th of March, 2012 at Kangemi Dagoreti Division within Nairobi County murdered ROBERT KIHU GANDU.
2. He pleaded not guilty to the said charges and to prove its case against the accused the prosecution called a total of ten (10) witnesses and at the close of the prosecution case the parties were called upon to make submissions as to whether the prosecution had made out a case to enable the court put the accused on his defence.
SUBMISSIONS
3. On behalf of the prosecution it was submitted that death of the deceased was proved by the evidence of Dr. Njeru (PW8) and that the accused was positively identified and placed at the scene of crime and therefore prima facie had been established. On behalf of the accused it was submitted that he prosecution case is merely circumstantial and that no case to answer had been proved for which the case of REPUBLIC v MARTIN OLUOCH OKWAKO & 2 OTHERS (2016) eKLR was submitted.
4. What is required at this stage was stated by Justice J.B Ojwang ( as he then was) in the case of REPUBLIC v SAMWEL KARANJA KURIA CRIMINAL CASE NO. 130 OF 2004 Nairobi (2009) eKLR 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. In this matter upon considering the prosecution case I am satisfied that a prima facie case has been established to enable the court call upon the accused to offer an explanation and hereby put the same on his defence. The accused is therefore advised of his rights under the provision of Section 306 of the 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