[2005] KEHC 796 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution failed to adduce any evidence directly linking the accused persons to the murder of Kioko Mutinda. None of the witnesses were able to identify the attackers, and the evidence presented was either irrelevant or insufficient to establish a prima facie case. The investigating...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2005] KEHC 796 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Mwangangi Syanda; Defendant: Charles Kyalo alias Mwana Ngoma; Defendant: Julius Kimeu Kyengo alias Kyauten; Defendant: Patrick Muinde Musa; Defendant: Sani Katiku Nzioka
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Machakos
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 22 of 2002
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on No Case to Answer
- Outcome
- acquittal
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Standard of Proof, Identification Evidence, 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
Mwangangi Syanda
Defendant
Charles Kyalo alias Mwana Ngoma
Defendant
Julius Kimeu Kyengo alias Kyauten
Defendant
Patrick Muinde Musa
Defendant
Sani Katiku Nzioka
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on No Case to Answer
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution established a prima facie case against the accused persons to warrant their being put on their defence.
- 2 Whether there was sufficient evidence linking the accused persons to the offence of murder.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution failed to adduce any evidence directly linking the accused persons to the murder of Kioko Mutinda. None of the witnesses were able to identify the attackers, and the evidence presented was either irrelevant or insufficient to establish a prima facie case. The investigating officer and the officer in charge, who could have clarified how the accused were implicated, were not called as witnesses. As a result, the evidence on record fell far below the standard required to put the accused on their defence. The court therefore acquitted all the accused persons under Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code and ordered their immediate release unless...
Court Disposition
acquittal
Orders
- The accused persons are acquitted of the charge of murder contrary to Section 203 and 204 of the Penal Code.
- The accused persons are to be set at liberty forthwith unless otherwise lawfully held.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
25 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MACHAKOS
Criminal Case 22 of 2002
REPUBLIC ………………………………………………………. PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
MWANGANGI SYANDA
CHARLES KYALO ALIAS MWANA NGOMA
JULIUS KIMEU KYENGO ALIAS KYAUTEN
PATRICK MUINDE MUSA
SANI KATIKU NZIOKA ………………………………………………. ACCUSED
R U L I N G
Mwangangi Syanda, Charles Kyalo alias Mwana Ngoma, Julius Kimeu Kyengo alias Kyauten, Patrick Muinde Musa and Sani Katiku Nzioka, (accused 1 – 5) were charged with the offence of Murder Contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code.
The particulars of the charge are that on 19/9/01 at Kariobangi Estate in Machakos Township in Machakos District, jointly murdered Kioko Mutinda. The 3rd accused is now deceased and the charge against him accordingly abated.
The prosecution called a total of 11 witnesses and after considering all the evidence adduced by these witnesses, the court finds that the prosecution has totally failed to adduce evidence linking the accused persons with the charge of murder. The deceased was asleep in his house on 19/9/01 at about 3. 00 a.m when people broke into the compound where there are several houses. Those present in the house with the deceased were PW1 Celina Mwongeli, who worked for the deceased and PW8 Bernedetta Mwikali Kioko, the deceased’s wife. PW1 said that after their door was broken, she attempted to run out as she had slept in the sitting room but was ordered back and a torch shone at her eyes. She was not able to see any of the assailants. PW8 recalled that when the murderers broke the gate and door, one person attacked her while another attacked the deceased with a hammer. PW8 was cut on the head and started to bleed whereas another attacked the deceased with a hammer and hit him on the head. PW8 was not able to identify any of the attackers as they were masked. Though her husband claimed to have got death threats, for giving evidence in court, the deceased had not revealed to her from where the threats came.
PW2 Kamene Ing’oti’s evidence was not relevant to this case. She recalled that she received information from PW5 that accused 1 had sent him to tell PW2 that he would kill her how they killed Kioko. PW5 Kavisi recalled that accused 1 whom he knew very well for along time had met him and sent him to PW2 to warn her that they would kill her how they killed Kioko. This evidence was not of any value because this was not a confession by accused 1.
PW3 Musau Mulwa Tole, spotted the 3rd accused near a shop where he lived in Kariobangi in Machakos. Again this evidence was not of much help. PW3 denied that his house was near that of the deceased. The houses were about 100 metres apart. PW4 Katonya Syeni’s evidence did not add any value to the prosecution case. He merely learnt of Kioko’s death.
PW6, Duncan Nzuki and PW7 Ali Bwana Hamisi lived in the same plot as deceased. They heard the gate of PW7 being broken and when they attempted to get out, found their doors bolted from outside. They only managed to get out after somebody opened for them. They found the attackers had already injured the deceased and his wife and they had fled. PW6, Doctor Kaburu, produced the postmortem report in respect of Doctor Kioko, who performed postmortem on deceased. He found the deceased to have a depressed skull, fracture of skull, brain contusion and lacerations and further found cause of death to be cardio pulmonary arrest secondary to intracranial bleeding. This was consistent with PW8’s evidence on the injuries that were inflicted on the deceased.
PW10, Police Constable Joseph Kiptoo, was given some instructions by the Officer in Charge of station who had a list of suspects. He went ahead to arrest the accused persons with the help of other officers. He had no idea how the Officer in charge got the names on the list. The Officer in charge of Station was not called as a witness. So far there is no evidence before the court linking the accused to the offence. PW11, Police Constable Alex Ogutu only escorted the deceased’s relatives to the mortuary to identify the body for purposes of postmortem.
The Investigation Officer was never called as a witness to shed light as to how he came to charge the accused persons. The result is that the evidence on record falls far below the standard required to establish a prima facie case and warrant the accused persons to defend themselves. They are therefore acquitted of the charge of murder Contrary to Section 203 and 204 of the Penal Code and are set at liberty forthwith unless otherwise lawfully held.
Dated at Machakos this 15th day of December 2005
R.V. WENDOH
JUDGE
Read and delivered in the presence of
R.V. WENDOH
JUDGE