[2017] KEHC 9499 (KLR)
The court found that, based on the evidence presented by the prosecution, particularly the testimony of PW1, a prima facie case had been established against the accused. The court emphasized that at this stage, it is not required to determine whether the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt, but...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEHC 9499 (KLR)
- Parties
- Respondent: Republic; Applicant: Silas Mugoye Lugalia
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 96 of 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer After Close of Prosecution Case
- Outcome
- The accused is found to have a case to answer and is placed on his defence.
- Judges
- J Wakiaga
- 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
Respondent
Silas Mugoye Lugalia
Applicant
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 to warrant placing him on his defence.
- 2 Whether the evidence presented by the prosecution is sufficient at this stage to require the accused to make a defence.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that, based on the evidence presented by the prosecution, particularly the testimony of PW1, a prima facie case had been established against the accused. The court emphasized that at this stage, it is not required to determine whether the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt, but only whether there is sufficient evidence to require the accused to make a defence. The court relied on the principle that a case to answer may be found even in borderline situations, and accordingly placed the accused on his defence, reminding him of his rights under Sections 306 and 307 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Court Disposition
The accused is found to have a case to answer and is placed on his defence.
Orders
- The accused is placed on his defence under Sections 306 and 307 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
25 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
MILIMANI LAW COURTS
CRIMINAL DIVISION
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 96 OF 2015
REPUBLIC ………………………….…………………………..……RESPONDENT
VERSUS
SILAS MUGOYE LUGALIA ………..……….……….…….….….…...….. ACCUSED
RULING
1. The Applicant SILAS MUGOYE LUGALIA is charged with the offence of murder contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code the particulars of which were that on the night of the 19th day of September, 2015 at Baba Dogo Estate within Nairobi county murdered GRACE WAHU.
2. He pleaded not guilty to the charges and to prove its case against the accused, the prosecution called a total of four (4) witnesses and at the close of the prosecution case parties were invited to make submissions on whether the State had established a prima facie case to enable the court place the accused person on his defence.
SUBMISSIONS
3. On behalf of the prosecution it was submitted that the State had placed the accused person at the scene of the crime which led to his arrest and had therefore established a prima facie case against the same. On behalf of the defence, it was submitted that the prosecution case had glaring contradictions and full of gaps that the prosecution hope the defence will fill for them and therefore the prosecution had failed to establish a prima facie case.
4. At this stage, the issue is not whether or not the prosecution has established a case against the accused person beyond reasonable doubt but whether a case has been made to justify calling upon the accused person to offer an explanation as was stated in the case of REPUBLIC v JAGJIVAN M. PATEL & Others (1) TLR as follows:-
“All the court has to decide at the close of the evidence in support of the charge is whether a case is made out against the accused just sufficiently to require him to make a defence, it may be a strong case or a weak case. The court is not required at this stage to apply its mind in deciding finally whether the evidence is worthy of credit or whether if believed it is weighty enough to prove the case conclusively beyond reasonable doubt. A ruling that there is a case to answer would be justified in my opinion in a border line case where the court, though not satisfied as to the conclusiveness of the prosecution evidence, is yet of the opinion that the case made out is one which on full consideration might possibly be thought sufficient to sustain a conviction.”
5. From the evidence tendered before court and in particular the evidence of PW1 and without saying much thereon I am satisfied and hold that the prosecution has established a prima facie case to enable the court place the accused on his defence which I hereby do. The accused is therefore reminded of his rights under Sections 306 and 307 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
DATED, DELIVERED and SIGNED at Nairobi this 11th day of October 2017
…………………………………….
J. WAKIAGA
JUDGE
In the presence of:-
Mrs. Kinoti for the State
Mr. Mashaka for Ruiru for the accused
Accused present
Tabitha court clerk