https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/10467

Republic v Mungai (Criminal Case E023 of 2020) [2026] KEHC 10467 (KLR) (Crim) (14 July 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 10467 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts) Criminal Criminal Case E023 of 2020 K Kimondo, J July 14, 2026 Between Republic Prosecutor and Kevin Njoroge Mungai Accused Ruling 1.The accused is charged with murder contrary to section 203 as read with section 204 of the Penal Code. 2.The Director of Public Prosecutions informs the High Court that on the night of 19th and 20th August 2020 around Northern Bypass within Zimmerman area, Kasarani Sub-County in Nairobi County jointly with others not before the court, murdered Mary Wanjiru Mwangi. 3.He pleaded not guilty. The prosecution lined up eleven witnesses. Two of them appeared before my predecessor, Nzioka J. On 24th January 2024, and, pursuant to section 200 (3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, the accused elected to proceed from where the matter had reached. 4.I am now called upon to determine whether that corpus of evidence is sufficient to place the accused on his defence. 5.The Republic lodged submissions dated 7th June 2026. Learned counsel for the defence replied through submissions dated 11th June 2026. 6.According to learned Principal Prosecution Counsel, Ms. M. M. Kigira, there is direct and strong circumstantial evidence showing the accused jointly with others killed the deceased. She relied on Republic v Julius Mbaabu M’Imwili [2020] KEHC 6672 (KLR), Stephen Ariga & ano v Republic [2018] eKLR, Bhatt v Republic [1957] E.A. 332 and Nyaga Kiura v Republic [2018] eKLR. 7.The accused on the other hand contends that key witnesses such as Emily Wanjiru and the bodaboda rider (who claimed to have witnessed the abduction of the deceased from Canopy Pub) did not testify in this case. Accordingly, the evidence of PW5 and PW6 amounts to hearsay. In short, counsel submitted that there is no direct evidence showing that the accused and another man had raped the deceased, were in possession of a firearm or shot her. 8.Learned counsel, Mr. J. Wakaba, argued further that there was no positive identification or evidence of a common intention. Additionally, the murder weapon was not produced and “there is no ballistic forensic links or eye witnesses linking the accused to the firearm”. He relied on R v Kipkering arap Koske & another 16 EACA 135 (1949) for the proposition that the entire evidence does not rise to the required threshold of proof. 9.My finding is as follows. According to C.I.P. Daniel Origi Ochwangi (PW5), on the material night and well past midnight, a motor cyclist led PC Bernard Nzomo (PW6) and PC Mailu on a pathway along a bushy area or thicket off Kamiti Road. PW5 then heard gunshots ring out. When it fell silent, he advanced towards the area and found the deceased naked with a gunshot wound to her femur. Emily, identified her as the friend who had earlier been kidnapped at Canopy area. It is worth noting that neither the cyclist nor Emily testified. 10.PW5 added that 20-50 metres from the scene, the accused was arrested and seemed to have “fallen after being trapped by his falling trousers”. Again, Emily told the police that he was one of the persons who abducted the deceased. According to PW5, “the footmarks from the victim to where we got him [accused] connected him” with the offence. 11.According to PW6, he was riding on the motorbike when they saw some people off the path. When they asked them what they were doing, they fired at them. He and a colleague Joseph Mailu fired back. They then saw a male person (accused) trying to escape. PW6 shot at him and he fell down. He said his trousers were “half-way down”. They arrested him. 12.This version was reiterated by Cpl George Odhiambo (PW2) who testified that when he and his colleagues reached the scene, they found a lady (the deceased) down with one leg of her trouser off and a male person (accused) who was handcuffed. They were both taken to Jacaranda Maternity Hospital for treatment but the deceased succumbed to her injuries. 13.Cpl Omutelema Japheth (PW7) revisited the scene on 19th August 2020 and recovered 11 spent cartridges a toy pistol and a Nokia cellphone (exhibits 4 (i-xi) & 5). S.S.P Alex Chirchir is a ballistics examiner and produced the report dated 31st August 2020 (Exhibit 8). 14.The death of the deceased is no longer in doubt. The deceased’s parents, Joseph Mwangi Maina (PW2) and Jane Wairimu Mwangi (PW4) identified the body for postmortem purposes at the City Mortuary. Doubt is also removed by the autopsy report made by Dr. Peter Muriuki Ndegwa (PW3). His opinion was that the cause of death was “exsanguination due to a single gunshot”. 15.It bears repeating that the accused is still deemed innocent at this stage. The inquiry at this juncture is merely to establish if a prima facie case has been made out requiring a rebuttal from the accused. 16.Upon a full digest of the combined evidence the eleven witnesses and applying the precedents in Bhatt v Republic [1957] E.A. 332 and R v Kipkering arap Koske & another 16 EACA 135 (1949), I readily find that the Republic has established a prima facie case against the accused. 17.Accordingly, under the provisions of section 306 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, I now place the accused on his defence.It is so ordered. DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 14TH DAY OF JULY 2026.KANYI KIMONDOJUDGERuling read virtually on Microsoft Teams in the presence of-The accused.Ms. M. Kigira for the Republic instructed by the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions.Mr. J. Wakaba for the accused instructed by Wakaba & Partners Advocates.Mr. E. Ombuna, Court Assistant.