[2021] KEHC 2890 (KLR)
The court, after considering the evidence tendered by the prosecution, found that a prima facie case had been established against the accused, Liban Kune Boru, for the offence of murder. The evidence presented by the ten prosecution witnesses, if left unrebutted, would be sufficient to support a conviction....
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEHC 2890 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Liban Kune Boru
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Embu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 19 of 2016
- 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
- LM Njuguna
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Prima Facie Case, Burden of Proof, Criminal Procedure, Case to Answer
- 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
Liban Kune Boru
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer at Close of Prosecution Case
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the accused to warrant putting him on his defence.
- 2 Whether the evidence adduced by the prosecution, if uncontroverted, would be sufficient to convict the accused.
Ratio Decidendi
The court, after considering the evidence tendered by the prosecution, found that a prima facie case had been established against the accused, Liban Kune Boru, for the offence of murder. The evidence presented by the ten prosecution witnesses, if left unrebutted, would be sufficient to support a conviction. Therefore, the accused is required to be put on his defence in accordance with Section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The court emphasized that at this stage, detailed reasons are not necessary unless the accused is to be acquitted, as per established case law. The accused is thus found to have a case to answer and is ordered to present his defence.
Court Disposition
Accused found to have a case to answer and put on his defence.
Orders
- The accused is hereby put on his defence to answer the charge of murder.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
19 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT EMBU
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 19 OF 2016
REPUBLIC......................................................................................................PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
LIBAN KUNE BORU............................................................................................ACCUSED
RULING
1. The accused herein faces the charge of murder contrary to section 203 as read with section 204 of the Penal code. The particulars of the offence are that on 23. 08. 2016 at Mwea Game Reserve in Makima location of Mbeere South sub-location within Embu County murdered Joseph Nyaga Maragua. He was arraigned in court on 7. 09. 2016 and upon the charges being read to him, he pleaded not guilty and a plea of not guilty entered accordingly.
2. The matter proceeded to hearing and the prosecution called a total of ten (10) witnesses in order to discharge its burden of proof after which the prosecution closed its case.
3. This court has a legal duty, upon close of the prosecution’s case, to make a ruling or a decision on whether an accused person has a case to answer or not. When the evidence of the witnesses for the prosecution has been concluded and the court is of the opinion that there is no evidence that the accused or any one of several accused committed the offence should, after hearing, if necessary, any arguments which the advocate for the prosecution or the defence may desire to submit, record a finding of not guilty (See Section 306(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code). On the other hand, when the evidence of the witnesses for the prosecution has been concluded and the court is of the opinion that there is evidence that the accused person or any one or more of several accused persons committed the offence, the court should proceed to put the accused to his/their defence and whereby the accused is supposed to present evidence in defence (See Section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code). As such, at this stage, this court’s role is to consider the evidence on record and make a determination as to whether the same presents a prima facie case that would warrant this court to call upon the accused to give their defences.
4. Under Section 211 of the Criminal Procedure Code, a prima facie case is established where the evidence tendered by the prosecution is sufficient on its own for a court to return a guilty verdict if no other explanation in rebuttal is offered by an accused person. (See also Ramanlal Trambaklal Bhatt –vs- R [1957] E.A 332 at 334 and 335).However, it is trite that, where the court is not acquitting the accused person at the close of prosecutions’ case, there is no need for a reasoned ruling for a case to answer. Reasons should only be given where the submissions of a no case to answer by the accused are upheld and the accused is to be acquitted. (See Festo Wandera Mukando–vsRepublic [1980] KLR 103).
5. I have considered the evidence tendered by the prosecution in this matter as required of this court and from the entirety of the said evidence, it is my view that the prosecution has made up a prima facie case against the accused person and which requires the accused to be placed on his defence so as to rebut the same. The accused person therefore has a case to answer and is hereby put on his defence.
6. It is so ordered.
DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED AT EMBU THIS 13TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2021.
L. NJUGUNA
JUDGE
............................for the Accused
............................for the Republic