[2015] KEHC 5805 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against the accused. The evidence, including eyewitness testimony from a minor who was present with the deceased, the presence of pesticide in the house, and the postmortem and government chemist reports confirming poisoning, was sufficient to...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] KEHC 5805 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Mildred Ilario
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kakamega
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 11 of 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer After Close of Prosecution Case
- Outcome
- Accused found to have a case to answer and put on her defence.
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Prima Facie Case, 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
Applicant
Mildred Ilario
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 against the accused to warrant putting her on her defence.
- 2 Whether the evidence adduced, if uncontroverted, would support a conviction for murder.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against the accused. The evidence, including eyewitness testimony from a minor who was present with the deceased, the presence of pesticide in the house, and the postmortem and government chemist reports confirming poisoning, was sufficient to require the accused to be put on her defence. The court emphasized that the incident occurred in broad daylight, the evidence of the minor witness was consistent, and the medical and chemical evidence corroborated the prosecution's case. Accordingly, the accused was found to have a case to answer and was put on her defence under section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Court Disposition
Accused found to have a case to answer and put on her defence.
Orders
- The accused is put on her defence under section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
- The accused may give sworn evidence, unsworn evidence, or remain silent, and may call witnesses.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT KAKAMEGA
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 11 OF 2010
REPUBLIC..................................................PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
MILDRED ILARIO...........................................ACCUSED
RULING
1. The accused 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 17-05-2010 at Masinga Village within Shinovi sub location, North Butsotso Location in Kakamega Central District within Western Province murdered PATRICK POMBO MANG'OLI (“the deceased”). He denied the charge. She was represented by Mr. Getanda.
2. In the course of the trial, which commenced on 01/02/2011 and ran up to 02/02/2015, the prosecution called Six (6) witnesses, at the end of which, the Defence counsel, Mr. Getanda filed written submissions and contended that the prosecution had not adduced sufficient evidence to warrant putting the accused on her defence, counsel urged this court to make a finding that the accused has no case to answer and acquit her under Section 210 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The correct section is 306 (1). Mr. Ngetich for the Prosecution has relied on the evidence on record and maintained that a prima facie case has been established to warrant putting the accused person on her defence.
3. The evidence by prosecution witnesses in this case was taken by different Judges and this court only took the evidence of PW6 the Investigating Officer after complying with Section 200 (3)of the Criminal Procedure Code. This Court has carefully gone through the entire evidence adduced by the prosecution, and considered the submissions by both learned counsel. The prosecution by close of its case is required to establish a prima facie case. Such a case is one where, if the accused does not offer any defence then the court could convict on the evidence on record.
4. In my view the Prosecution evidence on record establishes a prima facie case against the accused .The incident herein occurred in the morning in broad daylight. Even though PW3 is a minor her evidence was consistent. She was with the deceased also a minor when the accused allegedly gave them porridge and took the deceased allegedly to give him medicine. She has described the medicine as yellow. PW1 confirms that he had in the house some pesticide which had been used. Later PW3 testified that the deceased started vomiting and crying. She also started crying until her uncle PW4 came and took the deceased to hospital where he was pronounced dead on arrival. There is also the postmortem report Pexhibit 1 that was produced by the Doctor PW2 and the Government Chemist Result Pexhibit 3 that show that the deceased was poisoned.
5. Taking everything into account, I have found and concluded that the prosecution has made a prima facie case to warrant putting the accused on her defence on the murder charge preferred against her.
6. Accordingly, I rule that the accused has a case to answer. The accused is put on her defence under section 306 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The accused has the option of giving sworn evidence, in which case she will be subjected to cross-examination. In the alternative, she can give unsworn evidence in which case not questions will be put to her. The third option is for the accused to remain silent and let the court decide the case on the evidence that is before it. In each case, the accused is at liberty to call witnesses.
Delivered, dated and signed in open court at Kakamega this 19th day of February 2015
RUTH N. SITATI
J U D G E
In the presence of
Mr. Ngetich (present). for State
Mr. Getanda (present).. for Accused
Mr. F. Juma…….Court Assistant