[2023] KEHC 19837 (KLR)

[2023] KEHC 19837 (KLR)

The court found that the prosecution, having called five witnesses and presented its case, established a prima facie case against the accused for the offence of murder. The evidence, when taken at its highest, was sufficient to require the accused to be put on his defence as per the standard set out in R. Bhatt v...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEHC 19837 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Noor Korwa Mohamud
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Garissa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Criminal Case E004 of 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Whether Accused Has a Case to Answer After Close of Prosecution Case
Outcome
Accused found to have a case to answer and called upon to enter defence.
Judges
JN Onyiego
Legal Topics
Murder, Prima Facie Case, Criminal Procedure, Burden of Proof
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Murder Prima Facie Case Criminal Procedure Burden of Proof

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Republic

Applicant

Noor Korwa Mohamud

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Case / Ruling on Whether Accused Has a Case to Answer After Close of Prosecution Case

  1. 1 Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the accused to require him to tender a defence under Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
  2. 2 Whether the evidence presented by the prosecution, if uncontradicted, would warrant a conviction.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the prosecution, having called five witnesses and presented its case, established a prima facie case against the accused for the offence of murder. The evidence, when taken at its highest, was sufficient to require the accused to be put on his defence as per the standard set out in R. Bhatt v Republic and Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The court emphasized that at this stage, it is not required to determine guilt beyond reasonable doubt, but only whether there is a case to answer. Accordingly, the accused was called upon to elect whether to give sworn or unsworn testimony or to remain silent, and was informed of his right to call witnesses.

Court Disposition

Accused found to have a case to answer and called upon to enter defence.

Orders

  • The accused shall elect to give sworn or unsworn testimony or remain silent.
  • The accused has the right to call witnesses if he so wishes.