[2013] KEHC 4125 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution had adduced credible evidence through eyewitnesses and medical testimony establishing that the accused had a confrontation with the deceased, assaulted him, and that the assault caused the deceased's death. The post mortem report corroborated the cause of death. The accused's...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2013] KEHC 4125 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Nicholas Koros Aengwo alias Nixon
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Eldoret
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 77 of 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling at Close of Prosecution Case (no Case to Answer Submission)
- Outcome
- Accused found to have a case to answer and put on his defence.
- Judges
- AW Macharia
- Legal Topics
- Prima Facie Case, Burden of Proof, Homicide, No Case to Answer, Evidence Assessment
- 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
Nicholas Koros Aengwo alias Nixon
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling at Close of Prosecution Case (no Case to Answer Submission)
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 by the prosecution is credible and sufficient to sustain a conviction if uncontroverted.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution had adduced credible evidence through eyewitnesses and medical testimony establishing that the accused had a confrontation with the deceased, assaulted him, and that the assault caused the deceased's death. The post mortem report corroborated the cause of death. The accused's immediate flight from the scene further supported the prosecution's case. The court held that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against the accused, sufficient to require him to be put on his defence. The issue of motive was reserved for determination at the final judgment stage.
Court Disposition
Accused found to have a case to answer and put on his defence.
Orders
- The defence submission of no case to answer is overruled.
- The accused is put on his defence.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
High Court at Eldoret
Criminal Case 77 of 2012 [if gte mso 9]><xml>
Normal 0
false false false
EN-US X-NONE X-NONE
</xml><![endif]
REPUBLIC …............................................................................ PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
NICHOLAS KOROS AENGWO ALIAS NIXON ............................. ACCUSED
RULING
At the close of the prosecution case, court is expected to rule on whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the accused.
The definition of what a prima facie is, is well defined in the well known case of RAMANLAL TRANMBAKLAL BHATT -V- REPUBLIC (1957) EA, 332 in the following words:-
“1. The onus is on the prosecution to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and a prima facie case is not made out if, at the close of the prosecution case the case is merely one, which on full consideration might possibly be thought sufficient to sustain a conviction.
2. The question whether there is a case to answer cannot depend only on whether there is some evidence irrespective of its credibility or weight, sufficient to put the accuse on his defence. A mere scintilla of evidence can never be enough; nor can any amount of worthless discredited evidence”
In this case, eight prosecution witnesses have testified, PW2, 4 and 7 were eye witnesses who saw what transpired at the scene. It is not in doubt that the accused had a confrontation with the deceased which led to a scuffle prior to the death of the deceased. The eye witnesses testified that they saw the accused kick the deceased with his leg on the side of the stomach as a result of which the deceased fell down. That as they tried to give him first aid they realized he had died.
The post mortem report (P.Ext.1) produced by PW1 the doctor who conducted the post mortem exercise confirmed that the deceased died of injuries consistent with those he had sustained upon being assaulted by the accused. It is no doubt therefore, it is the accused who rendered the fatal blow to the deceased. It is also apparent the accused realized what he had done and he immediately fled from the scene. In the instance, I rule that the prosecution prima facie, has established that the death was occasioned by the accused. However, as to the motive that actuated the accused to cause the death, is an issue to be determined later on in the Judgment of the court.
I do accordingly overrule the defence and find that a prima facie case has been made out and I hereby put the accused on his defence.
DATEDand DELIVERED at ELDORET this 18th day of March, 2013.
G. W. NGENYE – MACHARIA
JUDGE
In the presence of:
Mr. Miyienda Advocate for the Accused
Mr. Omwenga for the State