[2017] KEHC 5240 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution had adduced sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case against the accused for the offence of murder. Applying the standard set out in Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code and the guidance from case law, the court held that the evidence, if unchallenged, could...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEHC 5240 (KLR)
- Parties
- Respondent: Republic; Defendant: Lawrence Githinji Mureithi
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nanyuki
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 23 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer After Close of Prosecution Case
- Outcome
- Accused found to have a case to answer and called upon to make his defence.
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Case to Answer, 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
Respondent
Lawrence Githinji Mureithi
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, if unchallenged, would warrant a conviction.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution had adduced sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case against the accused for the offence of murder. Applying the standard set out in Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code and the guidance from case law, the court held that the evidence, if unchallenged, could result in a conviction. Therefore, the accused must be called upon to make his defence, either personally, through sworn or unsworn statement, or by calling witnesses.
Court Disposition
Accused found to have a case to answer and called upon to make his defence.
Orders
- The accused is called upon to make his election on how to present his defence as per Section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
26 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYAAT NANYUKI
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 23 OF 2016
REPUBLIC.............................................PROSECUTOR
versus
LAWRENCE GITHINJI MUREITHI...............ACCUSED
RULING
1. The accused LAWRENCE GITHINJI MUREITHIwas charged with the offence of murder Contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code. He pleaded not guilty.
2 The prosecution has called five witnesses and concluded submitting its evidence and closed its case. This calls upon this court to consider whether the accused has a case to answer as provided under Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code Cap 75. In the case REPUBLIC – V- JOSEPH SHITANDI & ANOTHER [2014] eKLR the prosecution having closed its case the Judge in considering whether the accused had a case to answer stated:
“A case to answer is a case where if the accused keeps quiet, the evidence of the prosecution should be such that a conviction will result.”
At the close of the prosecution’s case, therefore, the court if it finds that the prosecution’s evidence could not lead to a conviction, then the accused should be acquitted. If however the court finds that the prosecution’s evidence suffices then the accused will be called to defend himself.
3. In this case I am satisfied that the evidence of the prosecution does suffice for the accused to be called upon to defend himself. Accordingly as per Section 306 (2) of Cap 75 the accused is informed that he has a right to address the court, either personally or by his advocate and to give evidence on his own behalf, or to make unsworn statement, and to call witnesses in his defence. The accused is now called upon to make his election on how he shall present his defence.
Dated and Delivered at Nanyuki this 7th JUNE 2017
MARY KASANGO
JUDGE
Coram
Before Justice Mary Kasango
Court Assistant: Njue/Mariastella
Accused: Lawrence Githinji Mureithi
For accused……………………………….
For state: ………………………………
Language …………………………………
COURT
Ruling delivered in open court
MARY KASANGO
JUDGE