[2015] KEHC 411 (KLR)
The court found that the evidence adduced by the defence's medical expert was not unforeseeable by the prosecution. However, the defence would not suffer prejudice as they would have the opportunity to cross-examine the prosecution's medical expert and would be provided with the medical report in advance. Therefore,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] KEHC 411 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Respondent: Reinos Kiptoo Chirchir
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kitui
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 23 of 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Prosecution Application to Adduce Further Evidence
- Outcome
- Objection dismissed. Prosecution granted leave to adduce further evidence.
- Judges
- BT Jaden
- Legal Topics
- Adducing Further Evidence, Rebuttal Evidence, Criminal Procedure, Medical Expert Evidence
- 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
Reinos Kiptoo Chirchir
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Prosecution Application to Adduce Further Evidence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution should be granted leave to adduce further evidence to rebut the medical evidence presented by the defence.
- 2 Whether the defence will suffer prejudice if the prosecution is allowed to call an additional medical expert.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the evidence adduced by the defence's medical expert was not unforeseeable by the prosecution. However, the defence would not suffer prejudice as they would have the opportunity to cross-examine the prosecution's medical expert and would be provided with the medical report in advance. Therefore, the prosecution's application to adduce further evidence was allowed, and the defence's objection was dismissed.
Court Disposition
Objection dismissed. Prosecution granted leave to adduce further evidence.
Orders
- The prosecution is granted leave to call Dr. Matu to rebut the medical evidence adduced by the defence.
- The defence shall be provided with the medical report in advance for preparation.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
19 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KITUI
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 23 OF 2015
REPUBLIC..................................................................... PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
REINOS KIPTOO CHIRCHIR ................................................ACCUSED
RULING
1. The prosecution has sought leave to adduce further evidence by calling of Dr. Matu to rebut the medical evidence adduced by Dw1, Dr. Muli Simon Kioko.
2. The application is opposed on grounds that the application is ambiguous and prejudicial to the defence. It is further stated that the defence is yet to be supplied with the medical report in question.
3. Section 309 of the Criminal Procedure Code provides as follows;
“If the accused person adduces evidence in his defence introducing new matter which the advocate for the prosecution could not by the exercise of reasonable diligence have foreseen, the court may allow the advocate for the prosecution to adduce evidence in reply to rebut it.”
4. There is no contention that the entire evidence adduced by Dw1, Dr Muli Simon Kioko was foreseeable. The defence will not suffer any prejudice as they will have an opportunity to cross examine the doctor. The defence will also be provided with the said doctors report well in advance for their preparation. Consequently, the objection is dismissed.
……………………………
B. THURANIRA JADEN
JUDGE
Dated and delivered at Machakos this 7thday of December2015.
………………………….
B. THURANIRA JADEN
JUDGE