[2021] KEHC 932 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution had adduced sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case against the accused, Wallace Kaniaru Gititu, for the murder of Mary Wambui Muraya. Applying the standard set out in Republic vs. Joseph Shitandi & Another and Republic vs. Stephen Chomba Kamau, the court determined...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEHC 932 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Wallace Kaniaru Gititu
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kiambu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 32 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer After Prosecution Closes Its Case
- Outcome
- Accused found to have a case to answer and put on his defence.
- Judges
- MM Kasango
- Legal Topics
- Murder Trial, Case to Answer, 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
Applicant
Wallace Kaniaru Gititu
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer After Prosecution Closes Its Case
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the accused to warrant putting him on his defence.
- 2 Whether the evidence adduced links the accused to the circumstances of the deceased's death.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution had adduced sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case against the accused, Wallace Kaniaru Gititu, for the murder of Mary Wambui Muraya. Applying the standard set out in Republic vs. Joseph Shitandi & Another and Republic vs. Stephen Chomba Kamau, the court determined that the evidence, if unchallenged, could result in a conviction. Therefore, the accused must be put on his defence to respond to the prosecution's case, as required by Section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Court Disposition
Accused found to have a case to answer and put on his defence.
Orders
- The accused is found to have a case to answer and is put on his defence as per Section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
- The accused is informed of his right to address the court, give evidence, or call witnesses in his defence.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
28 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT KIAMBU
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 32 OF 2018
BETWEEN
REPUBLIC.................................................PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
WALLACE KANIARU GITITU.....................ACCUSED
RULING
1. WALLACE KANIARU GITITU is charged with the offence of murder of Mary Wambui Muraya deceased. He pleaded not guilty. The prosecution called 7 witnesses before closing its case.
2. The court, at this stage, is considering whether the accused has a case to answer. A case to answer was defined in the holding of the case REPUBLIC VS. JOSEPH SHITANDI & ANOTHER (2014) eKLR as follows:-
“A case to answer is a case where if the accused keeps quiet, the evidence of the prosecution should be such that a conviction will result.”
3. The procedure in determination whether indeed, the accused has a case to answer was discussed in the case REPUBLIC VS. STEPHEN CHOMBA KAMAU (2021) eKLRthus:-
“REPUBLIC -V- SAMUEL KARANJA KIRIA (2009) eKLR Justice J.B Ojwang(as he then was) stated:-
‘The question at this stage is not whether or not the accused is guilty as charged but whether there is cogent evidence of his connection with the circumstances in which killing of deceased occurred. That the concept of prima facie case dictates as a matter of law that an opportunity created by this court for the accused to state his own case regarding the killing. The governing law on this point is well settled ... The Court of Appeal is Criminal Appeal No. 77/2006 expressed that too detailed analysis of evidence stage at no case to answer stage is undesirable it the court is going to put accused on his defence as too much details in the trial court’s ruling could then compromise the evidentiary quality of the defence to bemounted.’”
4. The evidence adduced by the prosecution suffices for the accused to be informed he has a case to answer. He is therefore informed he has a right to address the court as provided under Section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. Accordingly, the accused is informed that he has a right to address the court either personally or by his advocate or to give evidence on his own behalf or to make unsworn statement and to call witnesses in his defence. The accused is now requested to make his election.
RULING DATED AND DELIVERED AT KIAMBU THIS 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021.
MARY KASANGO
JUDGE
Coram:
Court Assistant : Maurice
For DPP : Ms. Kathambi/Kasyoka present
For Accused :- Mr. Njehu present
Accused : Wallace Kaniaru Gititu present
COURT
RULING delivered virtually.
MARY KASANGO
JUDGE