[2025] KEHC 7202 (KLR)
The court, after considering the testimony of six prosecution witnesses and the applicable legal principles, found that the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the accused persons for the offence of murder contrary to section 203 as read with 204 of the Penal Code. The evidence presented is...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEHC 7202 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Christopher Kiura Mugo; Defendant: Nicholas Karani Kiburu
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kerugoya
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 7 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer Under Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code
- Outcome
- Accused persons found to have a case to answer and called upon to make their defence.
- Judges
- EM Muriithi
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Prima Facie Case, Criminal Procedure, Case to Answer
- Source Language
- english
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
Christopher Kiura Mugo
Defendant
Nicholas Karani Kiburu
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 against the accused persons for the offence of murder contrary to section 203 as read with 204 of the Penal Code.
- 2 Whether the accused persons should be called upon to make their defence under section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Ratio Decidendi
The court, after considering the testimony of six prosecution witnesses and the applicable legal principles, found that the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the accused persons for the offence of murder contrary to section 203 as read with 204 of the Penal Code. The evidence presented is sufficient to require the accused persons to be put on their defence in accordance with section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The court is satisfied that, if the accused persons offered no explanation, a reasonable tribunal could convict on the evidence adduced by the prosecution. Accordingly, the accused persons are called upon to make their defence.
Court Disposition
Accused persons found to have a case to answer and called upon to make their defence.
Orders
- The accused persons are found to have a case to answer for the offence of murder contrary to section 203 as read with 204 of the Penal Code.
- The accused persons are called upon to make their defence under section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
25 paragraphs
Republic v Mugo & another (Criminal Case 7 of 2016) [2025] KEHC 7202 (KLR) (29 May 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 7202 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Kerugoya
Criminal Case 7 of 2016
EM Muriithi, J
May 29, 2025
Between
Republic
Prosecutor
and
Christopher Kiura Mugo
1st Accused
Nicholas Karani Kiburu
2nd Accused
Ruling
1. This is a ruling on a case to answer pursuant to section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The issue before the Court is whether there is prima facie evidence that the accused person(s) committed the offence of murder contrary to section 203 as read with 204 of the Penal Code, having regard to the elements of the offence of murder as observed in R. v Nyambura & 4 Others (2001) KLR 355, and approved by the Court of Appeal in Antony Ndegwa Ngari v R [2014] eKLR.
The Principle of prima facie Case in Criminal Cases 2. At this stage, the Court considers the prosecution evidence to establish whether a prima facie case exists, which as held in Ramanlal T. Bhatt v R (1957) EA 332, 335 is “one on which a reasonable tribunal properly directing its mind to the law and the evidence could convict if no explanation is offered by the defence.”
3. Where the Court finds that a prima facie case has been established as held in Kibera Karimi v R (1979) KLR 36 (Trevelyan & Todd JJ) so as not to prejudice the fair trial of the case by giving the impression that the court has already made up its mind without hearing the defence. See also Festo Wandera Mukando v R (1976 – 80) KLR 1626 and Antony Njue Njeru v R, Nairobi C.A. Cr. Appeal No. 77 of 2006 and the Kenya Judiciary Criminal Procedure Benchbook, 2018 at 99-100.
4. Where the court does not find that a prima facie case for the offence to have been established, a finding of not guilty is entered on the accused person pursuant to section 306 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code, and the accused is entitled to an acquittal, (see Murimi v R (1967) EA 542 and Wachira v. R (1975) EA 262), and the Court is required to give full reasons for the decision at this stage of case to answer, being a final decision for the trial court.
Finding 5. In this case, upon considering the testimony of the six (6) prosecution witnesses, the Court finds that there is evidence that the accused persons committed the offence and, consequently, the Prosecution has established a prima facie case against the accused persons in this case.
Orders 6. Accordingly, upon the finding that the Prosecution has established a prima facie case against the Accused persons for the offence of murder contrary to section 203 as read with 204 of the Penal Code, the Court shall call on the Accused persons to make their defence in terms of section 306 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
7. The Accused’s rights under section 306 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code shall be explained.
8. The case shall be mentioned on 17/6/2025 for directions as to Defence hearing.Order Accordingly.
DATED AND DELIVERED THIS 29TH DAY OF MAY 2025. EDWARD M. MURIITHIJUDGEAppearances:Mr. Mamba for DPP.Mr. Rurige for 1st Accused.Mr. Ndana for 2nd Accused