[2019] KEHC 3287 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution, having called four witnesses, established a prima facie case against the accused persons, Pius Koome and Stephen Miriti, for the offence of murder. The evidence presented was sufficient to require the accused to be put on their defence in accordance with Section 306 of the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEHC 3287 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Pius Koome; Defendant: Stephen Miriti
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 86 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer After Close of Prosecution Case
- Outcome
- Accused persons found to have a case to answer and placed on their defence.
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Prima Facie Case, Criminal Procedure, 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
Pius Koome
Defendant
Stephen Miriti
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer After Close of Prosecution Case
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the accused persons to warrant their being placed on their defence.
- 2 Whether the evidence adduced by the prosecution meets the threshold under Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code for a case to answer.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution, having called four witnesses, established a prima facie case against the accused persons, Pius Koome and Stephen Miriti, for the offence of murder. The evidence presented was sufficient to require the accused to be put on their defence in accordance with Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The court was satisfied that the threshold for a case to answer had been met, and therefore, the accused were placed on their defence to respond to the charge of murder as set out in the particulars of the offence.
Court Disposition
Accused persons found to have a case to answer and placed on their defence.
Orders
- Accused persons to be placed on their defence.
- Defence hearing scheduled for 4th November 2019.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
27 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 86 OF 2018
REPUBLIC.............................................................PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
PIUS KOOME........................................................ 1ST ACCUSED
STEPHEN MIRITI............................................... 2ND ACCUSED
RULING
1. The accused persons were charged with the offence of murder contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code CAP 63 of the Laws of Kenya.
2. The particulars of the offence are that Pius Koome and Stephen Miriti on the 5th day of September 2018 at Kirimampio Location in Igembe South Sub-County within Meru County jointly with another not before the court murdered Wilson Mweresa.
3. The prosecution closed its case on 3rd July 2019 after having called 4 witnesses. From the evidence of the 4 witnesses this court is convinced that a prima facie case has been raised requiring the accused persons to respond to the charge against them. They have a case to answer and are placed on their defence.
HON A.ONG’INJO
JUDGE
RULING DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED THIS 3RD DAY OF OCTOBER 2019
IN THE PRESENCE OF:-
C/A: JAPHETH
State: Mrs Mbithe for state
Accused 1 – present in person
Accused 2 – present in person
Defence counsel:- Mr Kaumbi holding brief for Otieno for accused person.
S.211 CPC explained and accused person reply
A1- sworn statement
A2- sworn statement
Mr Kaumbi: Defence shall call 2 witnesses
Order: Dhg 4. 11. 2019
HON A.ONG’INJO
JUDGE