[2017] KEHC 8113 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution had adduced sufficient circumstantial evidence to establish a prima facie case against the accused. The deceased was found dead with a stab wound in the accused's house, and the accused was seen leaving the premises and reporting to the police. These circumstances, which are...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEHC 8113 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic of Kenya; Defendant: Vincent Kiprotich Langat
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 112 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer
- Outcome
- Accused to be put on his defence.
- Judges
- JK Mulwa
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Case to Answer, Circumstantial Evidence, 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 of Kenya
Applicant
Vincent Kiprotich Langat
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case to require the accused to be put on his defence under Section 210 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
- 2 Whether the evidence adduced, though circumstantial, is sufficient to warrant the accused being called upon to defend himself.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution had adduced sufficient circumstantial evidence to establish a prima facie case against the accused. The deceased was found dead with a stab wound in the accused's house, and the accused was seen leaving the premises and reporting to the police. These circumstances, which are within the exclusive knowledge of the accused, require explanation. The court held that the evidence, though circumstantial, was credible and sufficient to warrant the accused being put on his defence as required by Section 210 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The defence's argument that there was no direct or circumstantial evidence was rejected, as the court found the...
Court Disposition
Accused to be put on his defence.
Orders
- The accused is hereby put on his defence as provided under Section 210 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NAKURU
CRIMINAL CASE NUMBER 112 OF 2014
REPUBLIC OF KENYA................................................PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
VINCENT KIPROTICH LANGAT........................................ACCUSED
RULING
The accused person Vincent Kiprotich Langat was charged with the offence of Murder Contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code. He denied the charge. The prosecution called four witnesses. I have considered the said evidence.
I am called upon to make a determination whether based on the evidence so far adduced, there is sufficient and credible evidence to call upon the accused to defend himself as provided for under Section 210 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
The prosecution has urged the court to find that the accused ought to be put on his defence where the defence by its written submissions states that their prosecution has failed to tender direct or circumstantial evidence.
In Republic -vs- Kyalo Musili Musyimi (2016) e KLR the court held:
“that the question whether there is a case to answer cannot depend only on whether there is some evidence irrespective of its credibility or weight sufficient to put the accused on his defence. A mere scscintilla of evidence can never be enough nor can any amount of worthless discredited evidence---”
The deceased was found dead with a knife stab on her chest in the accused's house. Evidence was adduced that the accused was seen leaving the gate of his house where the deceased lay dead and reported that he was going to the police station to make a report.
Circumstances under which the deceased was found dead in the accused house, and the accused presence at the gate of his house at the material time can only be explained by the accused himself.
For those reasons, I find sufficient circumstantial evidence to warrant the accused being put to his defence.
Orders accordingly.
Dated, Signed and Delivered this 30th Day of January 2017.
J.N. MULWA
JUDGE