[2024] KEHC 7855 (KLR)
The court, after considering the evidence of all five prosecution witnesses, found that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against the accused. This finding means that the evidence presented, if uncontradicted, would be sufficient to warrant a conviction. Therefore, the accused is required to be put...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEHC 7855 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Joseph Livambula Muhindi
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Vihiga
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 4 of 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer After Close of Prosecution Case
- Outcome
- Accused found to have a case to answer and is put on his defence.
- Judges
- JN Kamau
- Legal Topics
- Prima Facie Case, Case to Answer, Criminal Trial Procedure
- 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
Joseph Livambula Muhindi
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 require him to be put on his defence.
Ratio Decidendi
The court, after considering the evidence of all five prosecution witnesses, found that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against the accused. This finding means that the evidence presented, if uncontradicted, would be sufficient to warrant a conviction. Therefore, the accused is required to be put on his defence in accordance with the law.
Court Disposition
Accused found to have a case to answer and is put on his defence.
Orders
- The accused is put on his defence.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
Republic v Muhindi (Criminal Case 4 of 2022) [2024] KEHC 7855 (KLR) (26 June 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 7855 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Vihiga
Criminal Case 4 of 2022
JN Kamau, J
June 26, 2024
Between
Republic
Prosecution
and
Joseph Livambula Muhindi
Accused
Ruling
1. Njagi J took the evidence of Kelvin Anyuka (hereinafter referred to as “PW 1”) and Josphine Vihenda (hereinafter referred to as “PW 2”).
2. This court became seized of this matter on 17th April 2023. It took the evidence of Dr Collins Were Masika (hereinafter referred to as “PW 3”), Fredrick Musilwa Livambula (hereinafter referred to as “PW 4”), No 78796 Corporal Benard Ng’eno (hereinafter referred to as “PW 5”).
3. On 6th March 2024, the Prosecution closed its case after calling a total of five (5) Prosecution witnesses.
4. At the close of the Prosecution case, both parties indicated to court that they would not be filing any written submissions on the question of whether the Accused person had a case to answeror not but that they would rely on the evidence on record.
5. Having carefully considered the evidence of the said Prosecution witnesses, the court was of the opinion that a prima facie case had been established against the Accused person herein to warrant him being put on his defence. He is hereby put on his defence.
6. It is so ordered.
DATED and DELIVERED at VIHIGA this 26th day of June 2024J. KAMAUJUDGEHCCRC NO 4 OF 2022 0