[2016] KEHC 4157 (KLR)

[2016] KEHC 4157 (KLR)

The court found that none of the prosecution witnesses placed accused 4 and 8 at the scene of the murder, nor did any witness describe their role in the offence. Although there was evidence of prior land disputes between the deceased and accused 4 and 8, this was insufficient to establish a prima facie case. Accordingly, the court acquitted accused 4 and 8 under Section 306(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The court found that a prima facie case had been established against accused 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7, who were therefore called upon to defend themselves.

Citation
[2016] KEHC 4157 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Stanley Mutuma M’Imana; Defendant: Gitonga Mathayo Alias G K Alias Mutisya; Defendant: Samson Michubu Kanyana; Defendant: Charles Ntonja M’Nthaka; Defendant: Joseph Gitonga Alias Kato; Defendant: Lawi Kamenchu M’Nthaka; Defendant: Samuel Gitonga Zakayo; Defendant: Joseph Kariuki Kiringo Alias Muchangi
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Meru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
23 June 2016
Case Number
Criminal Case 69 of 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on No Case to Answer After Close of Prosecution Case
Outcome
Partial acquittal; accused 4 and 8 acquitted, others to defend themselves.
Judges
RPV Wendoh
Legal Topics
Murder, Prima Facie Case, Acquittal, Criminal Procedure, Burden of Proof
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Murder Prima Facie Case Acquittal Criminal Procedure Burden of Proof

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Republic

Applicant

Stanley Mutuma M’Imana

Defendant

Gitonga Mathayo Alias G K Alias Mutisya

Defendant

Samson Michubu Kanyana

Defendant

Charles Ntonja M’Nthaka

Defendant

Joseph Gitonga Alias Kato

Defendant

Lawi Kamenchu M’Nthaka

Defendant

Samuel Gitonga Zakayo

Defendant

Joseph Kariuki Kiringo Alias Muchangi

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Case / Ruling on No Case to Answer After Close of Prosecution Case

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the prosecution established a prima facie case against each accused to warrant being placed on their defence.
  2. 2 Whether accused 4 and 8 should be acquitted under Section 306(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that none of the prosecution witnesses placed accused 4 and 8 at the scene of the murder, nor did any witness describe their role in the offence. Although there was evidence of prior land disputes between the deceased and accused 4 and 8, this was insufficient to establish a prima facie case. Accordingly, the court acquitted accused 4 and 8 under Section 306(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The court found that a prima facie case had been established against accused 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7, who were therefore called upon to defend themselves.

Court Disposition

Partial acquittal; accused 4 and 8 acquitted, others to defend themselves.

Orders

  • Accused 4 Charles Ntonja M’Nthaka and accused 8 Joseph Kariuki Kiringo Alias Muchangi are acquitted under Section 306(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
  • Accused 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7 are called upon to defend themselves.