[2022] KEHC 10323 (KLR)
The court, after considering the evidence tendered by the prosecution, found that a prima facie case had been established against the accused persons. The evidence, if uncontroverted, would be sufficient to warrant a conviction. Therefore, the accused persons have a case to answer and are required to present their...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEHC 10323 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: John Muriithi Ndwiga; Defendant: Anne Wanja Harrison; Defendant: Martin Wachira Mwaniki
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Embu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 13 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer After Close of Prosecution Case
- Outcome
- Accused persons found to have a case to answer and are put on their defence.
- Judges
- LM Njuguna
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Prima Facie Case, Case to Answer, Criminal Procedure, Burden of Proof
- 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
John Muriithi Ndwiga
Defendant
Anne Wanja Harrison
Defendant
Martin Wachira Mwaniki
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 persons to warrant putting them on their defence.
- 2 Whether the evidence adduced by the prosecution, if uncontroverted, would be sufficient to convict the accused persons.
Ratio Decidendi
The court, after considering the evidence tendered by the prosecution, found that a prima facie case had been established against the accused persons. The evidence, if uncontroverted, would be sufficient to warrant a conviction. Therefore, the accused persons have a case to answer and are required to present their defence as provided under section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The court's role at this stage is not to give a reasoned ruling unless it finds no case to answer, but in this instance, the prosecution's evidence met the threshold to put the accused on their defence.
Court Disposition
Accused persons found to have a case to answer and are put on their defence.
Orders
- The accused persons are put on their defence under section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
27 paragraphs
Republic v Ndwiga & 2 others (Criminal Case 13 of 2016) [2022] KEHC 10323 (KLR) (20 July 2022) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2022] KEHC 10323 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Embu
Criminal Case 13 of 2016
LM Njuguna, J
July 20, 2022
Between
Republic
Prosecution
and
John Muriithi Ndwiga
1st Accused
Anne Wanja Harrison
2nd Accused
Martin Wachira Mwaniki
3rd Accused
Ruling
1. The accused persons herein were charged with the offence of murder contrary tosection 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code. The particulars of the offence being that on June 26, 2016 at unknown time at Mwondu village, Kathetu Sub-Location of Mbeere North Sub County, within Embu County jointly with others not before court murdered Silas Ngare Kithae. Upon arraignment in court, they pleaded not guilty and a plea of not guilty was entered.
2. The case proceeded for trial and wherein the prosecution called eight (8) witnesses in support of its case; after which it closed its case.
3. Under section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code cap 75 Laws of Kenya, this court has a duty, upon close of the prosecution’s case, to make a ruling or a decision on whether an accused person has a case to answer or not. Under Section 306(1), when the evidence of the witnesses for the prosecution has been concluded and the court is of the opinion that there is no evidence that the accused person committed the offence should, after hearing, if necessary, any arguments which the advocate for the prosecution or the defence may desire to submit, record a finding of not guilty.
4. Under section 306(2) on the other hand, when the evidence of the witnesses for the prosecution has been concluded and the court is of the opinion that there is evidence that the accused person committed the offence, the court should proceed to put the accused to his defence and whereby the accused is supposed to present evidence in his defence.
5. As such, at this stage, this court’s role is to consider the evidence on record and make a determination as to whether the same presents a prima facie case that would warrant this court to call upon the accused persons to give their defence. Under section 211 of the Criminal Procedure Code, a prima facie case is established where the evidence tendered by the prosecution is sufficient on its own for a court to return a guilty verdict if no other explanation in rebuttal is offered by an accused person. [See Ramanlal Trambaklal Bhatt v R[1957] E A 332 at 334 and 335].
6. However, it is trite that, where the court is not acquitting the accused person at the close of prosecutions’ case, there is no need for a reasoned ruling for a case to answer. Reasons should only be given where the submissions of a no case to answer by the accused is upheld and the accused is to be acquitted. ( See Festo Wandera Mukando v Republic[1980] KLR 103).
7. I have considered the evidence tendered by the prosecution in this matter as required of this court and from the entirety of the evidence, it is my view that the prosecution has made up a prima facie case against the accused persons. They therefore have a case to answer and are put on their defence.
8. It is so ordered.
DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED AT EMBU THIS 20TH DAY OF JULY, 2022. L. NJUGUNAJUDGE...........................................for the Accused.............................................for the State