[2025] KEHC 9896 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution's evidence was insufficient to establish a prima facie case against the accused. The only direct evidence was from the Doctor regarding the cause of death, but there was no admissible evidence linking the accused to the offence. The investigating officer's testimony relied on...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEHC 9896 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Micah Wafula Masinde alias Micah Wafula Barasa
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kitale
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case E004 of 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer
- Outcome
- acquittal
- Judges
- RK Limo
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Standard of Proof, No Case to Answer, Hearsay Evidence
- 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
Micah Wafula Masinde alias Micah Wafula Barasa
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case to require the accused to be put on his defence for the charge of murder.
- 2 Whether the evidence tendered by the prosecution is sufficient and admissible to sustain a conviction if the accused elects to remain silent.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution's evidence was insufficient to establish a prima facie case against the accused. The only direct evidence was from the Doctor regarding the cause of death, but there was no admissible evidence linking the accused to the offence. The investigating officer's testimony relied on information from an alleged eyewitness who was not called to testify, rendering the evidence hearsay and inadmissible. The civilian witness (PW2) did not witness the murder and could not identify the perpetrator. As a result, the court held that the prosecution failed to meet the threshold required to place the accused on his defence. Consequently, under section 306 of the...
Court Disposition
acquittal
Orders
- The accused, Micah Wafula Masinde alias Micah Wafula Barasa, is acquitted of the charge of murder under section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
- The accused shall be set at liberty unless otherwise lawfully held.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
Republic v Masinde alias Micah Wafula Barasa (Criminal Case E004 of 2022) [2025] KEHC 9896 (KLR) (10 July 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 9896 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Kitale
Criminal Case E004 of 2022
RK Limo, J
July 10, 2025
Between
Republic
Prosecution
and
Micah Wafula Masinde alias Micah Wafula Barasa
Accused
Ruling
1. Micah Wafula Masinde alias Micah Wafula Barasa, the accused herein is charged with the offence of Murder contrary to section 203 as read with section 204 of the Penal Code. The particulars are that on 17/2/23 at Kiminini Trading Centre within Trans-Nzoia he murdered Edwin Wekesa Kibebe.
2. The accused denied the charge and the prosecution has called 3 witnesses one of whom is the Doctor (PW1) who testified that he conducted a post mortem examination on the body of the deceased and opined that the cause of death was a head injury secondary to assault by a blunt object. He tendered post mortem report as PExhibit 1.
3. This court is now being called upon to determine based on the evidence tendered if the evidence tendered is sufficient to place the accused person on his defence.
4. The prosecution called the Doctor as observed above, one civilian witness (PW2) and the investigating officer (PW3) in the case.
5. The evidence of PW2 lacked any probative value to the prosecution’s case because she did not witness the murder and had no knowledge of who did it.
6. It is quite apparent that the evidence of the Doctor and the investigating officer required corroboration for the prosecution’s case against the accused to stand. Unfortunately, the evidence given by the investigating officer with respect to the reasons that informed her to charge the accused with the offence he faces was based on the evidence of a witness not called to testify. The investigating officer stated that there was an eye witness to the murder incident named Esther Naliaka.
7. In the absence of the alleged eye witness, the information received by the investigating officer and evidence tendered by her is rendered hearsay and inadmissible in evidence.
8. This court finds that the evidence tendered by the prosecution against the accused is so weak that even if the accused were to be placed on his defence and elects to stay silent, this court would not sustain a conviction against him simply because of lack of sufficient evidence.The evidence tendered by the prosecution has simply failed to reach the threshold required to place the accused on his defence. This court finds that the accused has no case to answer and under section 206 of Criminal Procedure Code he is hereby acquitted of the charge of murder and shall be set free unless lawfully held.
DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED AT KITALE THIS 10TH DAY OF JULY , 2025. HON JUSTICE R.K. LIMOKITALE HIGH COURTRuling delivered in open courtIn the presence of;Wekhuyi for accused – absentMr Korir for the StateAccused – presentDuke/Chemosop – court assistants