[2015] KEHC 983 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution had adduced sufficient evidence through eyewitness testimony, identification parade, and forensic analysis of the murder weapon to establish a prima facie case against both accused persons. The evidence, if believed, would be sufficient to support a conviction. Accordingly, the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] KEHC 983 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Samson Alube Ngota; Defendant: Robison Nginya Kamau
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 28 of 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer
- Outcome
- Each accused has a case to answer; matter to proceed to defence hearing.
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Prima Facie Case, Identification Parade, Dna 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
Samson Alube Ngota
Defendant
Robison Nginya Kamau
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the accused persons to warrant their being put on their defence.
- 2 Whether the identification of the accused and the recovery of the murder weapon sufficiently link the accused to the offence.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution had adduced sufficient evidence through eyewitness testimony, identification parade, and forensic analysis of the murder weapon to establish a prima facie case against both accused persons. The evidence, if believed, would be sufficient to support a conviction. Accordingly, the court ruled that each accused has a case to answer and must elect how to proceed with their defence in accordance with Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Court Disposition
Each accused has a case to answer; matter to proceed to defence hearing.
Orders
- Each accused is found to have a case to answer and is called upon to elect how to proceed with his defence in accordance with Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
CRIMINAL CASE NO.28 OF 2011
REPUBLIC.........................................PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
1. SAMSON ALUBE NGOTA.............1ST ACCUSED
2. ROBISON NGINYA KAMAU..........2ND ACCUSED
RULING
Samson Alube Ngota and Robinson Nginya Kamau are charged with the offence of murder contrary to section 203 as read with section 204 of the Penal Code. The particulars are that on 20th March 2011 at Kariobangi South Estate Nairobi within Nairobi area province murdered Rahab Nyawira.
The prosecution case is that the two accused accosted the deceased and PW1 while on their way home. They pushed the deceased against the wall of a building and when PW1 raised an alarm, the two fled. The deceased stumbled back into her cousin's house which they had just left holding her chest stating “hawa watu wameniua” (those people have killed me.) She collapsed on the floor and it was then that PW1 and PW2 realized that she had been stabbed and was bleeding. The murder weapon [Exh. 1] was said to have been recovered from the accused on the night of the incident. Both accused were picked out in an identification parade by PW1. The identification parade was conducted by CI. Peter Mwaura who testified as PW10. PW9 subjected the knife to DNA analysis and concluded that the blood found on it matched that of the deceased.
I have carefully considered the prosecution evidence now on record as tendered by the 12 prosecution witnesses who were called. I have also considered the submissions made by the prosecution counsel and defence counsel. It is my considered view that the prosecution has established a prima facie case against both accused persons. Each has a case to answer. Each accused may now elect how to proceed with his defence in accordance with Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Orders accordingly.
Ruling, delivered and dated at Nairobi this 25th day of November, 2015
R.LAGAT-KORIR
JUDGE
In the presence of:
…......................................: Court clerk
…......................................: 1st Accused
…………………………………: 2nd Accused
…......................................: For State
…………………………………: For 1st accused/applicant
…………………………………: For 2nd accused/applicant