[2020] KEHC 8393 (KLR)
The court found that, although the evidence presented by the prosecution was largely circumstantial and there were no eyewitnesses to the alleged killing, the totality of the evidence established a prima facie case sufficient to require the accused to be called upon to make his defence. The court applied the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEHC 8393 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Leonard Kiprop Serem
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kabarnet
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 68 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer Under Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code
- Outcome
- The accused is found to have a case to answer and is called upon to make his defence.
- Judges
- EM Muriithi
- Legal Topics
- Case to Answer, Circumstantial Evidence, Standard 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
Leonard Kiprop Serem
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer Under Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case to require the accused to make his defence under section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
- 2 Whether circumstantial evidence adduced is sufficient to support a finding of guilty at this stage.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that, although the evidence presented by the prosecution was largely circumstantial and there were no eyewitnesses to the alleged killing, the totality of the evidence established a prima facie case sufficient to require the accused to be called upon to make his defence. The court applied the standard set out in section 306(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code and relevant case law, holding that the circumstantial evidence adduced was adequate to support a finding of guilty at this stage. Accordingly, the accused must be informed of his rights under section 306(2) and the matter set for defence hearing.
Court Disposition
The accused is found to have a case to answer and is called upon to make his defence.
Orders
- The accused shall be informed of his rights under section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
- The trial shall be set for defence hearing.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
17 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KABARNET
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 68 OF 2017
REPUBLIC..................................................................................PROSECUTOR
=VERSUS=
LEONARD KIPROP SEREM............................................................ACCUSED
RULING
1. This is a ruling pursuant to section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code as to whether there is a case to answer against the accused to warrant his being called upon to make his defence. Counsel for the accused and for the prosecution (DPP), when invited to make submissions on case to answer, both indicated that they did not wish to make any arguments at this stage, and left it to court to make a decision based on the evidence adduced.
2. I have considered the evidence presented to Court by the 6 prosecution witnesses and being mindful of its duty under section 306 (1) of the CPC as held by Murimi v. R (1967) EA 542 to acquit an accused if no evidence that the accused committed the offence, and of the standard of proof of prima facie evidence as set out in Ramanalal Bhatt v. R. (1957) EA 332, I find that although the evidence was largely circumstantial as there was no eye-witnesses to the act of killing, the prosecution has established a prima facie to support a finding of guilty on the circumstantial evidence (see Simoni Musoke v. R (1958) E.A. 715) to warrant the calling upon the Accused to make his defence.
3. The accused shall be informed of his right under section 306 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, “to address the court either personally or by his advocate (if any); [and] to give evidence on his own behalf, or to make an unsworn statement, and to call witnesses in his defence” and the trial shall, consequently, be set for defence hearing.
Order accordingly.
DATED AND DELIVERED THIS 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020.
EDWARD M. MURIITHI
JUDGE
Appearances:
M/S Mong’eri & Co. Advocates for the Accused.
Mr. Abwajo, Prosecution Counsel for the DPP.