[2014] KEHC 781 (KLR)
The court found that, although there was no direct evidence identifying the accused as the perpetrator, the circumstantial evidence—specifically, the presence of a blue jeans jacket belonging to the deceased and stained with blood group A, which matched the accused's blood group—was sufficient to establish a prima...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] KEHC 781 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Mulinge Moni Ngusyi
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Machakos
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 21 of 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer at Close of Prosecution's Case
- Outcome
- Accused found to have a case to answer and ordered to defend himself.
- Judges
- LN Mutende
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Prima Facie Case, Burden of Proof, Criminal 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
Mulinge Moni Ngusyi
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer at Close of Prosecution's Case
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the accused to warrant putting him on his defence.
- 2 Whether the evidence adduced, though circumstantial, is sufficient to require an explanation from the accused.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that, although there was no direct evidence identifying the accused as the perpetrator, the circumstantial evidence—specifically, the presence of a blue jeans jacket belonging to the deceased and stained with blood group A, which matched the accused's blood group—was sufficient to establish a prima facie case. Applying the standard from Ramanlal Trambakal Bhatt v Republic, the court held that a reasonable tribunal could convict if no explanation was offered by the defence. Therefore, the accused was called upon to defend himself pursuant to Section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Court Disposition
Accused found to have a case to answer and ordered to defend himself.
Orders
- The accused is called upon to defend himself pursuant to Section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
17 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MACHAKOS
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 21 OF 2009
REPUBLIC …………………………………...PROSECUTION
VERSUS
MULINGE MONI NGUSYI………………………....ACCUSED
R U L I N G
Mulinge Moni Ngusyi is charged with murder contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code.
Particulars of the offence being that on the night of 30th September 2006 at Kyaani village, Kaliambeu sub Location, Mbaani Location, Yathui Division in Machakos District within the Eastern Province murdered Kioko Mululi.
At the close of the prosecution’s case there was no direct evidence pointing at a particular individual as to who committed the offence but there was evidence of a blue jeans jacket stated to belong to the deceased which was lightly stained with human blood of group A. A sample of blood of the accused was examined and found to be of group A.
At this stage this court must establish if a prima facie case has been disclosed against the accused. In the case of Ramanlal Trambakal Bhatt versus Republic (1957) E.A. 332such a case was defined as one:
“A reasonable tribunal properly directing its mind to the law and the evidence could convict if no explanation is offered by the defence.”
This is a case where the court could convict on evidence adduced subject to the necessary caution if no explanation is tendered. In the circumstances it calls upon this court to have the accused defend himself pursuant to the provisions of Section 306 (2)of theCriminal Procedure Code.
It is so ordered.
DATED, SIGNEDand DELIVERED at MACHAKOS this 3RDday of DECEMBER , 2014.
L.N. MUTENDE
JUDGE