[2015] KEHC 2661 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution had adduced sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case against the accused for the offence of murder. The evidence, while not required at this stage to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, was not worthless and was adequate to require the accused to answer the charge....
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] KEHC 2661 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Peter Okoth Oriango
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kisii
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Murder Case 4 of 2006
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer After Close of Prosecution's Case
- Outcome
- Accused found to have a case to answer and put on his defence.
- Judges
- AT Sitati
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Prima Facie Case, Malice Aforethought, 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
Peter Okoth Oriango
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer After Close of Prosecution's Case
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case requiring the accused to be put on his defence.
- 2 Whether the evidence adduced by the prosecution is sufficient to warrant the accused to answer the charge of murder.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution had adduced sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case against the accused for the offence of murder. The evidence, while not required at this stage to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, was not worthless and was adequate to require the accused to answer the charge. Accordingly, the accused was called upon to elect one of the three options available under Section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code: to give sworn evidence, to give unsworn evidence, or to remain silent, with the right to call witnesses in his defence.
Court Disposition
Accused found to have a case to answer and put on his defence.
Orders
- The accused is put on his defence in accordance with Section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
- The accused to elect one of the three options for defence: sworn evidence, unsworn evidence, or silence, with the right to call witnesses.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KISII
CRIMINAL CASE (MURDER) NO.4 OF 2006
REPUBLIC ……………………………………………….…………… PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
PETER OKOTH ORIANGO ………………………..………….………… ACCUSED
RULING
The accused person herein, Peter Okoth Oriango was arraigned before this honourable court on 23rd February 2005 charged with murder contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 205of the Penal Code. The case was heard but later declared a mistrial and by the information dated 14th October 2011, it is alleged that on the 9th November 2005 at Awendo Market within Migori District in Nyanza Province, he murdered Olango Nyamisi.
The accused pleaded not guilty and the hearing of the case started in earnest on 8th May 2013. The prosecution called 6 witnesses through whose testimonies, the prosecution sought to prove that the accused had malice aforethought to kill the deceased and that through his acts on 9th November 2005, he carried out his intentions by killing the deceased.
At the close of the prosecution’s case, Mr. O.M. Otieno, counsel for the accused, asked court to make a ruling on whether or not the accused has a case to answer.
I have now considered very carefully all the evidence that is on record. I have also considered the relevant provisions of the law and case law on what constitutes a prima faciecase requiring an accused person to be put on his defence. After considering all the above, I am satisfied that the prosecution has placed sufficient evidence before the court requiring the accused person to answer the charge. In deciding whether or not the accused has a case to answer, the court is aware that no amount of worthless evidence shall suffice in this regard. The court is also aware that at this stage, the evidence against the accused person need not be such as would prove the case beyond any reasonable doubt. Proof of the case beyond any reasonable doubt is a requirement placed upon the state once the court has heard evidence from both the State and the defence.
Thus being satisfied that the accused must be put on his defence in accordance with Section 306 (2)of the Criminal Procedure Code, the accused has three (3) options open to him in defending himself. First, he can give sworn evidence in which case, he will be asked questions by the prosecution. Second, he can choose to give unsworn evidence in which case, no one will ask him any questions. Third, the accused can choose to remain silent and let the court decide the case on the evidence that is before it. Whichever mode the accused elects in defending himself, he has a right to call witnesses.
It is now upon the accused to let the court know which of the three options he will take in defending himself.
Dated and delivered at Kisii this 26th day of March, 2014.
R.N. SITATI
JUDGE
In the presence of:
Mr. Ochieng (present) for State
Miss Gogi (present) for Accused
Mr. Bubi - Court Clerk