[2024] KEHC 14321 (KLR)
The court found that, upon considering the evidence of the 11 prosecution witnesses and the exhibits produced, a prima facie case had been established against the accused. The contradictions highlighted by the defence were not sufficient at this stage to displace the prosecution's case. The court emphasized that the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEHC 14321 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Maureen Akoth Onyango
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kisumu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case E019 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer
- Outcome
- Accused found to have a case to answer and placed on her defence.
- Judges
- RE Aburili
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Prima Facie Case, 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
Maureen Akoth Onyango
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 to warrant her being placed on her defence.
- 2 Whether contradictions in prosecution evidence undermine the case against the accused.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that, upon considering the evidence of the 11 prosecution witnesses and the exhibits produced, a prima facie case had been established against the accused. The contradictions highlighted by the defence were not sufficient at this stage to displace the prosecution's case. The court emphasized that the burden at this stage is not to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, but to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to require the accused to be placed on her defence. Accordingly, the accused was found to have a case to answer and was placed on her defence in accordance with the law.
Court Disposition
Accused found to have a case to answer and placed on her defence.
Orders
- The accused, Maureen Akoth Onyango, is found with a case to answer and is placed on her defence.
- Provisions of Article 50(2)(i)(k)(l) of the Constitution and Section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code are read out and explained to the accused.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
29 paragraphs
Republic v Onyango (Criminal Case E019 of 2023) [2024] KEHC 14321 (KLR) (11 November 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 14321 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Kisumu
Criminal Case E019 of 2023
RE Aburili, J
November 11, 2024
Between
Republic
Prosecutor
and
Maureen Akoth Onyango
Accused
Ruling
1. The accused person herein is Maureen Akoth Onyango. She is charged with the offence of murder contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code.
2. Particulars of the offence as per information dated 24th July 2023 are that on the 2nd day of July 2023 at Katito Township area in Nyakach Sub-county within Kisumu County, the accused murdered Kennedy Onyango Olonde.
3. The accused took plea of Not Guilty after being examined by a psychiatrist and being found fit to stand trial.
4. The prosecution has called 11 witnesses who testified in a bid to establish a prima facie case against the accused person and now the question is whether a prima facie case has been established against the accused to warrant her to be place on her defence.
5. The defence counsel Mr. Okello submitted that the prosecution had not proved its case against the accused person beyond reasonable doubt. That there are contradictions in the evidence adduced by PW 2 the arresting officer who could not describe the knife allegedly recovered from the accused as a murder weapon and PW 3.
6. That PW 3 stated that the knife was brown in cross-examination. That PW 6 disowned the statement written on 25th July 2023 while PW 4 was giving hearsay evidence as he did not see the event take place or visit the scene of the alleged murder.
7. Counsel urged the court to find the accused to have no case to answer and acquit her. The prosecution counsel did not submit.
8. I have considered the evidence of the 11 prosecution witnesses, the exhibits produced and the oral submissions by the defence counsel on no case to answer.
9. The burden of proof lies on the prosecution to prove its case against the accused person beyond reasonable doubt. However, at this stage, what is required is to establish a prima facie case.
10. What is a prima facie case? A prima facie case in criminal case is defined as……
11. In the instance case, considering the evidence adduced as a whole, and without delving deep into the merits thereof, I am satisfied that a prima facie case has been established against the accused person to warrant her to be placed on her defence.
12. Accordingly, Maureen Akoth Onyango is found with a case to answer and is placed on her defence.
13. The provisions of Article 50 (2) (i) (k) (l) of the Constitution as read with Section 306 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code are read out and explained to the accused in the presence of her advocate Mr. Okello.
14. I so order.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT KISUMU THIS 11TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024R. E. ABURILIJUDGE