[2018] KEHC 1510 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution's evidence, including the eyewitness testimony of PW2 who saw the accused assault and drag the deceased, and the circumstantial evidence regarding possible motive, was sufficient to establish a prima facie case against both accused persons. Applying the principles from Bhatt v...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEHC 1510 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Peter Nginya Maina; Defendant: Siriako Maina Nginya
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Murang'a
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 10 of 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Prima Facie Case at Close of Prosecution's Case
- Outcome
- Both accused put on their defence under section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
- Judges
- K Kimondo
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Prima Facie Case, Criminal Procedure, 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
Peter Nginya Maina
Defendant
Siriako Maina Nginya
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Prima Facie Case at Close of Prosecution's Case
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the accused to warrant their being put on their defence.
- 2 Whether the evidence adduced links the accused to the murder of John Gikungu Waweru.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution's evidence, including the eyewitness testimony of PW2 who saw the accused assault and drag the deceased, and the circumstantial evidence regarding possible motive, was sufficient to establish a prima facie case against both accused persons. Applying the principles from Bhatt v Republic and R v Kipkering arap Koske, the court held that the evidence required the accused to be put on their defence under section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The court was satisfied that the prosecution had met the threshold for a case to answer, and accordingly ordered both accused to be put on their defence.
Court Disposition
Both accused put on their defence under section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Orders
- Both accused are put on their defence to answer the charge of murder.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
27 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT MURANG’A
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 10 OF 2012
REPUBLIC...................................................................................PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
PETER NGINYA MAINA.............................................................1ST ACCUSED
SIRIAKO MAINA NGINYA.........................................................2ND ACCUSED
RULING
1. The accused are charged with murder contrary to section 203 as read with section 204 of the Penal Code.
2. The particulars are that on the night of 24th and 25th February 2011 at Kiawambeu Village, Muchungucha Sub-location, Mbiri Location within Murang’a County, they jointly murdered John Gikungu Waweru.
3. They pleaded notguilty. The prosecution called threewitnesses.
4. I have considered the direct and circumstantial evidence surrounding the homicide.
5. I have paid heed to the evidence of PW2. She testified that on 24th February 2011 at Ndikwe Bar, she saw the two accused persons beat a man unconscious. She also stated that the two dragged the bleeding man outside the bar. When she saw the body of the deceased at a bridge the following day, she claimed it was that of the person assaulted by the accused.
6. There is also the testimony of PW3 that the deceased may have had an illicit affair with the wife of the 1st accused.
7. I am well guided by Bhatt v Republic [1957] E.A. 332, R v Kipkering arap Koske & another 16 EACA 135 (1949).
8. On the summation of the evidence of the all the three witnesses, I am persuaded that the Republic has established a prima facie case against both accused.
9. Accordingly, under the provisions of section 306 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, I put both accused on their defence.
It is so ordered.
DATED, SIGNEDandDELIVERED at MURANG’Athis 20th day of December 2018.
KANYI KIMONDO
JUDGE
Ruling read in open court in the presence of-
Accused.
Mr. Kinuthia for Mr. Mwaniki for the accused.
Ms. Gichuru for the Republic.
Ms. Dorcas and Ms. Elizabeth, Court Clerks.