[2019] KEHC 9658 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution, through the testimony of nine witnesses, established a prima facie case against all four accused persons. The evidence presented placed the accused in the company of the deceased at the material time and location, raising sufficient questions as to their involvement in the death...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEHC 9658 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Samson Mithika alias Kaboy; Defendant: Dorine Mukiri Anampiu; Defendant: Peninah Kaigongi Anampiu; Defendant: Silas Gikundi alias Mwalimu
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 22 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer
- Outcome
- accused persons found to have a case to answer and placed on their defence
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Criminal Procedure, Prima Facie Case
- 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 Mithika alias Kaboy
Defendant
Dorine Mukiri Anampiu
Defendant
Peninah Kaigongi Anampiu
Defendant
Silas Gikundi alias Mwalimu
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 placed on their defence.
- 2 Whether the evidence adduced by the prosecution links the accused persons to the murder of the deceased.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution, through the testimony of nine witnesses, established a prima facie case against all four accused persons. The evidence presented placed the accused in the company of the deceased at the material time and location, raising sufficient questions as to their involvement in the death of Francis Gitonga Githiora. Consequently, the accused persons are required to provide an explanation as to how the deceased met his death while in their company. The court therefore ruled that the accused have a case to answer and are placed on their defence in accordance with the law.
Court Disposition
accused persons found to have a case to answer and placed on their defence
Orders
- Accused persons are placed on their defence.
- Defence hearing scheduled for 4th June 2019.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
38 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT MERU
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 22 OF 2016
REPUBLIC....................................................PROSECUTION
VERSUS
SAMSON MITHIKA ALIAS KABOY.........1ST ACCUSED
DORINE MUKIRI ANAMPIU.....................2ND ACCUSED
PENINAH KAIGONGI ANAMPIU.............3RD ACCUSED
SILAS GIKUNDI ALIAS MWALIMU........4TH ACCUSED
RULING
The accused persons Samson Mithika alias Kaboy, Dorine Mukiri Anampiu, Penina Kang’ong’I Anampiu and Silas Gikundi alias Mwalimu were jointly charged with the offence murder contrary to section 203 as read with section 204 of the penal code.
Particulars are that the accused persons on the 24th day of April 2016 at Muganda village Anjuki Location, Mikinduri Division in Tigania East Subcounty within Meru County jointly murdered Francis Gitonga Githiora.
Upon listening to evidence of prosecutions 9 witnesses this court is of the view that the accused persons owe an explanation to the court on how the deceased met his death while in their company. They have a case to answer and are placed on their defence.
..................................
HON. A.ONG’INJO
JUDGE
RULING SIGNED, DELIVERED AND DATED THIS 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019.
In the presence of:
CA:-Kinoti
Ms Mbithe for state
A1:-present in person
A2:-present in person Mr Kithinji holding brief for Ashaba for accussed
A3:-present in person persons
A4:-present in person
...................................
HON. A.ONG’INJO
JUDGE
Court
S. 211 C.P.C explained to accused persons – how to defend themselves and they reply :-
A1: No Witness
A2: Sworn statement. No witness
A3: Sworn statement: No witness
Order
Defence hearing on 4. 6.2019. Copy of ruling to be supplied to defence counsel.
...................................
HON. A.ONG’INJO
JUDGE