[2005] KEHC 1641 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution's evidence, if believed, was sufficient to establish a prima facie case against the accused. The court was satisfied that the accused was sufficiently linked to the offence through evidence placing him at the scene, his alleged possession of the murder weapon, and his...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2005] KEHC 1641 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Respondent: Paul Kivisi Lusiti
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Bungoma
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 3 of 1997
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on No Case to Answer at Close of Prosecution's Case
- Outcome
- Accused found to have a case to answer and ordered to be placed on his defence.
- Legal Topics
- Prima Facie Case, No Case to Answer, Burden of Proof, Criminal Procedure
- 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
Paul Kivisi Lusiti
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on No Case to Answer at Close of Prosecution's Case
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the accused to warrant placing him on his defence.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution's evidence, if believed, was sufficient to establish a prima facie case against the accused. The court was satisfied that the accused was sufficiently linked to the offence through evidence placing him at the scene, his alleged possession of the murder weapon, and his identification at the location of the crime. Consequently, the court held that the prosecution had met the threshold required under section 306(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code and ordered the accused to be placed on his defence.
Court Disposition
Accused found to have a case to answer and ordered to be placed on his defence.
Orders
- The accused is hereby placed on his defence.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
10 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT BUNGOMA Criminal Case 3 of 1997
REPUBLIC………………………………..……PROSECUTOR VS PAUL KIVISI LUSITI………………………….…..ACCUSED
RULING
At the close of the prosecution’s case the parties were invited to make submissions under the provisions of section 306 (1) of the criminal procedure code. Mr. Were who appears for the accused was of the view that the prosecution had not established a prima facie case to enable this court place the accused person on his defence. He punched several holes on the evidence tendered in support of the prosecution’s case. He beseeched this court to hold that the accused had no case to answer and proceed to acquit his client.
At the other ridge, Mr. Onderi, the senior state counsel was of the view that the prosecution had established a prima facie case to enable this court place the accused on his defence. He pointed out that the accused was at the scene of crime and had a gun which according to the prosecution was used to gun down the deceased. It is his submission that the accused was positively identified at the report office where the deceased met his death.
I have anxiously and carefully considered the rivaling submissions of both learned counsels. I have also keenly considered the evidence presented by the prosecution witnesses. At this stage I only need to ask myself whether or not the prosecution has made out a case to warrant this court exercise its jurisdiction to place the accused on his defence. I am convinced and satisfied that the evidence adduced by the prosecution witnesses show that the accused committed the offence. It is therefore crystal clear that the prosecution has established a prima facie to warrant this court to place the accused person on his defence which I hereby order. Having done that, then it is now upon the accused to state how he intends to make his defence.
DATED AND DELIVERED THIS 25th DAY OF February 2005
J.K. SERGON
JUDGE