[2011] KEHC 999 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution's evidence, as adduced so far, established a prima facie case against the accused persons. Consequently, the accused are required to be put on their defence in accordance with the law. The court explained the options available to the accused for their defence, including making a...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2011] KEHC 999 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Muimi Nzale Wambua; Defendant: Stephen Nzale
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Machakos
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 102 of 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Trial / Ruling on Case to Answer
- Outcome
- Accused persons found to have a case to answer and put on their defence.
- Legal Topics
- Case to Answer, Defence Options, Prima Facie Case
- 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
Muimi Nzale Wambua
Defendant
Stephen Nzale
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial / Ruling on Case to Answer
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the accused to require them to be put on their defence.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution's evidence, as adduced so far, established a prima facie case against the accused persons. Consequently, the accused are required to be put on their defence in accordance with the law. The court explained the options available to the accused for their defence, including making a sworn or unsworn statement or remaining silent, and their right to call witnesses.
Court Disposition
Accused persons found to have a case to answer and put on their defence.
Orders
- The accused are put on their defence and invited to indicate the manner in which they wish to defend themselves.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
15 paragraphs
No.2985
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT MACHAKOS
HC.CR. CASE NO.102 OF 2008
REPUBLIC........................................................PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
MUIMI NZALE WAMBUA..................................................1ST ACCUSED
STEPHEN NZALE.............................................................2ND ACCUSED
RULING
I have carefully read and considered the evidence so far adduced by the Prosecution in support of the information preferred against the accused and I am satisfied that a prima facie case has been established to warrant the accused to being on their defence, and I so rule. The accused are informed that there are three ways in which they can defend themselves. They can choose to make a sworn or unsworn statements of defence, or even keep quiet. However, in the event that they elect to make sworn statements of defence, they would be liable to cross-examination by the prosecution. But not so if they elect to make unsworn statement or even keep quiet.
All cases, however, they are entitled to call witnesses. I will now invite the accused to inform me the manner in which they propose to defend themselves.
Dated, signedanddelivered at Machakosthis 18th day of November, 2011.
ASIKE-MAKHANDIA
JUDGE