[2022] KEHC 11807 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution's evidence, including eyewitness testimony placing the accused at the scene assaulting the deceased, and medical evidence confirming the cause of death as injuries consistent with the alleged assault, was sufficient to establish a prima facie case. The standard for a case to...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEHC 11807 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Patrick Ashira Omukupa
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kakamega
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 18 of 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer
- Outcome
- Accused found to have a case to answer and placed on his defence.
- Judges
- PJO Otieno
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Prima Facie Case, Burden of Proof, Post Mortem Evidence
- 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
Patrick Ashira Omukupa
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the accused sufficient to require him to be put on his defence.
- 2 Whether the evidence adduced links the accused to the death of the deceased.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution's evidence, including eyewitness testimony placing the accused at the scene assaulting the deceased, and medical evidence confirming the cause of death as injuries consistent with the alleged assault, was sufficient to establish a prima facie case. The standard for a case to answer is whether the evidence, if unchallenged, could support a conviction. The court held that this threshold was met, and therefore the accused must be put on his defence to answer the charge of murder.
Court Disposition
Accused found to have a case to answer and placed on his defence.
Orders
- The accused is found to have a case to answer and is accordingly placed on his defence.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
Republic v Omukupa (Criminal Case 18 of 2015) [2022] KEHC 11807 (KLR) (13 July 2022) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2022] KEHC 11807 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Kakamega
Criminal Case 18 of 2015
PJO Otieno, J
July 13, 2022
Between
Republic
Prosecution
and
Patrick Ashira Omukupa
Accused
Ruling
1. Patrick Ashira Omukupa is charged with murder contrary to section 203 as read with section 204 of the Penal Code. The particulars of the offence are that on March 19, 2015 at about 1. 00 am. at Ebwaliro Village Ekero location in Mumias Sub-county within Kakamega County he murdered Ibrahim Obongita Shitandi (herein referred to as the deceased).
2. The prosecution case is that the deceased was previously a resident of Ebwaliro village. That he bought a farm in Bungoma and shifted there. He rented his house at Ebwaliro village to the accused. The accused was staying in the said house with his family.
3. That on the March 18, 2015, the deceased travelled to Ebwaliro village to attend the funeral of his uncle. That on the night of March 18 and 19, 2015 there was a funeral vigil at the home of the uncle who had died. The deceased’s brother Isaack Okumu, PW2, was in the vigil. The deceased was also in attendance. That at 1 am Okumu PW2 saw the deceased going towards his house which was a short distance away from his uncle’s home. Soon after, he, Okumu heard shouts coming from the house of the deceased. He and other people went to the house of the deceased. They found the accused beating the deceased outside the house of the deceased. They separated them and went back to the funeral vigil. On the following day at 6 am the mother to the deceased PW3 went to the house of the deceased to wake him up. She found him lying unconscious on his bed. She called other people. The deceased was taken to St Mary’s Hospital, Mumias. He was admitted. He died on March 22, 2015. The accused was arrested by villagers and taken Mumias police station. Later a post mortem was performed on the body by two doctors from the above said hospital. The doctors found the body with bruises on the forehead and left temporal region, massive right haemothorax (bleeding in the chest cavity) and massive bleeding in the brain. The doctors formed the opinion that the cause of death was due to the bleeding in the chest cavity and due to the brain injury. The accused was charged with the offence that he is facing. He denied the charge. During the hearing the post-mortem report was produced in court as exhibit, Ex1.
4. Isaack Okumu PW2 says that he saw the accused beating the deceased on the night of March 19, 2015. On the following morning the deceased was found unconscious in his house. He subsequently died after 4 days.
5. A prima facie case , it has been held, is one on which the court could convict on even if no explanation is offered by the defence- See Ramanlal Trambaklal Vs Republic ( 1957) EA 332. I find that the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the accused. The accused has a case to answer and is accordingly placed to his defence.
DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED IN OPEN COURT AT KAKAMEGA THIS 13TH DAY OF JULY, 2022. PATRICK J. O. OTIENOJUDGEIn the presence of:Mr. Shivega for the AccusedMs. Chala for ProsecutionCourt Assistant: Kulubi