[2006] KEHC 1944 (KLR)
The court, after evaluating the evidence of the nine prosecution witnesses, found that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against the accused. Applying the principle from RAMANLAL TRAMBAKLAL BHATT v. R., the court held that there was sufficient credible evidence to require the accused to be placed on...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2006] KEHC 1944 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Reuben Kiptanui Kiptoo
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Eldoret
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 67 of 2005
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Whether to Place Accused on Defence After Prosecution Case
- Outcome
- Accused placed on his defence.
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Prima Facie Case, 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
Reuben Kiptanui Kiptoo
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Whether to Place Accused on Defence After Prosecution Case
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case to warrant placing the accused on his defence.
- 2 What is the threshold for a prima facie case in a murder trial.
Ratio Decidendi
The court, after evaluating the evidence of the nine prosecution witnesses, found that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against the accused. Applying the principle from RAMANLAL TRAMBAKLAL BHATT v. R., the court held that there was sufficient credible evidence to require the accused to be placed on his defence. The court emphasized that the threshold for a prima facie case is not met by a mere scintilla or worthless evidence, but by evidence that, if unchallenged, would warrant a conviction. Accordingly, the accused was placed on his defence to answer the charge of murder.
Court Disposition
Accused placed on his defence.
Orders
- The accused is hereby placed on his defence to answer the charge of murder.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT ELDORET
Criminal Case 67 of 2005
REPUBLIC …………………………………………………………………………… PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
REUBEN KIPTANUI KIPTOO ……………………………...................………………… ACCUSED
RULING
REUBEN KIPTANUI KIPTOO has been charged with the offence of murder contrary to section 203 as read with 204 of the Penal Code. The particulars of the offence are that on 5/6/2005 at Kamok Village, Kapchelal Sub-Location, Kokwao Location in Keiyo District of the Rift Valley Province, he murdered JOSEPH KORIR KIMITEI.
The prosecution called nine (9) witnesses, at the end of which, it was of the view that Kiptoo, whom I shall now refer to as ‘the accused’ should be placed on his defence, while the defence was of a different view.
It is my task at this stage, to rule on whether, the prosecution has established that it has a prima facie case to warrant placing the accused on his defence.
I am guided by the legal principle that ‘the onus is on the prosecution to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and a prima facie case is not made out if, at the close of the prosecution, the case is merely one “which on full consideration might possible be thought sufficient to sustain a conviction……..the question whether there is a case to answer cannot depend only on whether there is “some evidence irrespective of its credibility or weight, sufficient to put the accused on his defence. A mere scintilla of evidence can never be enough; nor can any amount of worthless discredited evidence”’(RAMANLAL TRAMBAKLAL BHATT v. R. [1957] E.A.332,333)
I have evaluated the evidence for the prosecution and I am of the view that the prosecution has a prima facie case against him and that it is necessary that the accused be placed on his defence, and I accordingly place him on his defence.
Dated and delivered at Eldoret this 21st day of June 2006.
JEANNE GACHECHE
JUDGE
Delivered in the presence of:
Mr. Omutelema for the state
Mr. Mwetich holding brief for Mr. Kutwa for the accused person
Accused person