[2019] KEHC 7206 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution had adduced sufficient evidence through the testimony of eleven witnesses to establish a prima facie case against the accused persons. The evidence on record, if unchallenged, could support a conviction for the offence of murder. Therefore, the accused persons have a case to...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEHC 7206 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Titus Mutua Kilonzo; Defendant: Richard Mbuvi Kyengo
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Makueni
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 97 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Trial / Ruling on Case to Answer After Close of Prosecution Case
- Outcome
- Accused persons found to have a case to answer and put on their defence.
- Judges
- CM Kariuki
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Case to Answer, Criminal Trial Procedure
- 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
Titus Mutua Kilonzo
Defendant
Richard Mbuvi Kyengo
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial / 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 persons to warrant them being put on their defence.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution had adduced sufficient evidence through the testimony of eleven witnesses to establish a prima facie case against the accused persons. The evidence on record, if unchallenged, could support a conviction for the offence of murder. Therefore, the accused persons have a case to answer and are required to be put on their defence in accordance with Section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Court Disposition
Accused persons found to have a case to answer and put on their defence.
Orders
- The accused persons are hereby put on their defence.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
18 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MAKUENI
HCCR NO. 97 OF 2017
REPUBLIC......................................................PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
TITUS MUTUA KILONZO.........................1ST ACCUSED
RICHARD MBUVI KYENGO.....................2ND ACCUSED
RULING
1. The accused persons were charged with the offence ofMurder Contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code, Cap 63 of the Laws of Kenya.
2. Particulars being that on night of 10/03/2014, at Yikivumbu Village of Kambu Sub-location of Kibwezi District within Makueni County, murdered Bernard Mbithi Mwongela.
3. They pleaded not guilty and matter went into trial.
4. The prosecution called eleven witnesses to prove its case.
5. Upon closure of the prosecution case, the court is called to make a ruling as to whether the accused persons have a case to answer and thus be put on their defence.
6. The court has gone through the evidence on record and accused’s advocate submissions and has come to conclusion that the prosecution has adduced sufficient evidence to warrant the accuseds to be put on their defence.
7. The court therefore puts the accused persons on their defence.
SIGNED, DATED AND DELIVERED THIS 31ST DAY OF MAY 2019, IN OPEN COURT.
C. KARIUKI
JUDGE