[2014] KEHC 839 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case against the accused. There was no eyewitness testimony linking the accused to the murder, no evidence explaining the deceased's whereabouts after leaving the drinking place, and, most critically, no medical evidence was produced to establish...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] KEHC 839 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Peter Ochieng Obondo
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kisumu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Murder Case 11 of 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Murder Trial / Ruling on No Case to Answer
- Outcome
- acquittal
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Burden of Proof, Standard of Proof, Acquittal, 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
Peter Ochieng Obondo
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Murder Trial / Ruling on No Case to Answer
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution established a prima facie case to require the accused to be put on his defence.
- 2 Whether there was sufficient evidence linking the accused to the murder of the deceased.
- 3 Whether the cause of death was established by the prosecution.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case against the accused. There was no eyewitness testimony linking the accused to the murder, no evidence explaining the deceased's whereabouts after leaving the drinking place, and, most critically, no medical evidence was produced to establish the cause of death. In the absence of such evidence, the court held that it would be unsafe and contrary to law to require the accused to be put on his defence. Consequently, the accused was acquitted under section 210 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Court Disposition
acquittal
Orders
- The accused is acquitted under section 210 of the Criminal Procedure Code unless lawfully held for another cause.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
17 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KISUMU
MURDER NO. 11 OF 2011
REPUBLIC....................................................................................PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
PETER OCHIENG OBONDO...............................................................ACCUSED
R U L I N G
1). The accused herein was charged with the offence of murder contrary to section 203 as read with section 204 of the penal code. The particulars were that on the nights of 2nd and 3rd February 2011 at Marera sub location, Kisumu West District within Nyanza Province murdered Yuanita Abonyo Ndolo.
2). The accused person pleaded not guilty to the charge. The prosecution called a total of 3 witnesses. PW1 James Ndolo, who was the deceased husband told the court that on 1-2-2011 his wife left the homestead at around 6 p.m. She did not come back that night. The following day he was informed that a body of some lady had been burned at the homestead of the accused. The witness then went to the scene and identified the body to be that of his wife.
3). PW2 Nahashon Opiyo, was taking changaa that evening with the deceased, the accused among others. The following morning the accused came to his house and told his wife that he had been attacked that night by thugs and his house burned
4). PW3 Owenga Anyango, was equally in the group that were taking changaa in the house of one Opiyo. He left after drinking his portion of the changaa. The following morning he learned that the accused house had been burned.
5).These were the only prosecution witnesses called. The prosecution was however unable to call any other witnesses despite myriad of adjournments granted to it. The prosecution closed their case.
6).Having perused the evidence of the three witnesses I do not find that the prosecution have been able to establish a case capable of putting the accused person on his defence. There was no eye witness to the murder of the deceased. Nobody was able to explain the whereabouts of the deceased from the time she left the drinking place. Equally, nobody was able to tell whether or not the deceased was actually with the accused that fateful night.
7). Further and of great significance, there was no evidence adduced to suggest the cause of death of the deceased. No medical evidence which is a crucial element in such a case was ever produced.
8).In the premises I shall order that there is no sufficient evidence adduced so as to put the accused in his defence. He is therefore acquitted under section 210 of the Criminal Procedure Code Chapter 75 Laws of Kenya unless lawfully held.
Dated, signed and delivered at Kisumu this 9th day of December, 2014.
H.K. CHEMITEI JUDGE