[2023] KEHC 23856 (KLR)
The court, after considering the entirety of the prosecution's evidence, found that a prima facie case had been established against the accused for the two counts of murder. The evidence presented was sufficient to require the accused to be put on his defence, as a reasonable tribunal could convict on the basis of...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEHC 23856 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Edwin Mwenda Njeru
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Embu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 13 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer Under Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code
- Outcome
- The accused is found to have a case to answer and is put to his 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
Edwin Mwenda Njeru
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer Under Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code
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 sufficient to require the accused to answer to the charges of murder.
Ratio Decidendi
The court, after considering the entirety of the prosecution's evidence, found that a prima facie case had been established against the accused for the two counts of murder. The evidence presented was sufficient to require the accused to be put on his defence, as a reasonable tribunal could convict on the basis of the prosecution's case if no explanation was offered by the defence. The court relied on the statutory test under section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code and the judicial interpretation of a prima facie case as articulated in Ramanlal Trambaklal Bhatt v R and Republic v Abdi Ibrahim Owi. The court emphasized that the burden of proof remains on the prosecution and that the...
Court Disposition
The accused is found to have a case to answer and is put to his defence.
Orders
- The accused is put to his defence under section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
Republic v Njeru (Criminal Case 13 of 2018) [2023] KEHC 23856 (KLR) (18 October 2023) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEHC 23856 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Embu
Criminal Case 13 of 2018
LM Njuguna, J
October 18, 2023
Between
Republic
Prosecution
and
Edwin Mwenda Njeru
Accused
Ruling
1. The accused faces two counts of Murder contrary to section 203 as read together with section 204 of the Penal Code. Particulars of the 1st count are that on 10th June 2017, at Njarange village Ishiara location in Mbeere North sub-county within Embu County, the accused murdered Pauline Kagendo. Particulars of the 2nd count are that on 10th June 2017, at Njarange village Ishiara location in Mbeere North sub-county within Embu County, the accused murdered Johnstone Muriithi.
2. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and the case proceeded to trial. The prosecution called eight (8) witnesses in support of their case.
3. This court is tasked under Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code, with making a ruling on whether or not the accused person has a case to answer and whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case. The provision states:Section 306 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code:“When the evidence of the witnesses for the Prosecution has been concluded, the court, if it considers that there is no evidence that the accused or any one of the several or any one of the several accused committed the offence shall, 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. Based on the evidence of the prosecution, this court must make a finding as to whether the evidence is sufficient to enable the court to return a guilty verdict, regardless of whether the evidence is rebutted. The court in the case of Republicvs Abdi Ibrahim Owi (2013) eKLR, defined a prima facie case as follows:“‘Prima facie’ is a latin word defined by Black’s Law Dictionary 8th Edition as, “sufficient to establish a fact or raise presumption unless disapproved or rebutted”. ‘Prima facie’ is defined by the same dictionary as “the establishment of a legally required rebuttable presumption.”
5. In other words, a prima facie case is a rebuttable presumption that the accused person is guilty of the offence. This is the position held at Section 211 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Further, in the case of Ramanlal Trambaklal Bhattvs. R (1957) E.A 332 at 335, the court stated as follows:“Remembering that the legal onus is always on the Prosecution to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, we cannot agree that a prima facie case is made out if, at the close of the prosecution’s case, the case is merely one in which on full consideration might possible be thought sufficient to sustain a conviction.” This is perilously near suggesting that the court would not be prepared to convict if no defence is made, but rather, hopes the defence will fill the gaps in the Prosecution case.……there is a case to answer depends only on whether there is “some evidence, irrespective of its credibility or weight, sufficient to put the accused on his defence”. A mere scintilla of evidence can never be enough; nor can any amount of worthless discredited evidence. It may not be easy to define what is meant by a, “prima facie case”, but at least it must mean one on which a reasonable, properly directing its mind to the law and the evidence could convict if no explanation is offered by the defence”.
6. Nevertheless, where the court is not acquitting the accused person, there is no need to give a deep reasoning in this ruling for case to answer. The case would have been otherwise where there was a submission on ‘no case to answer’ as the court would have been required to give its reasons for considering that the accused has no case to answer.
7. I have considered the evidence by the prosecution in its entirety and it is my considered view that a prima facie case has been established. The accused person has a case to answer and is therefore put to his defense.It is so ordered.
DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED AT EMBU THIS 18TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023. L. NJUGUNAJUDGE................................ for the State................................ for the Accused