https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kemc/2026/144

Republic v Wanjala (Criminal Case E1958 of 2021) [2026] KEMC 144 (KLR) (24 June 2026) (Judgment) Neutral citation: [2026] KEMC 144 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the Bungoma Law Courts Criminal Case E1958 of 2021 RN Maloba, SPM June 24, 2026 Between Republic Prosecution and Richard Wabwoba Wanjala Accused Judgment 1.Accused namely Richard Wabwoba Wanjala was charged with the offence of manslaughter contrary to section 205 of the penal code. He allegedly committed this offence on 11/10/2021 jointly with others not before court by unlawfully caused the death of one David Wamalwa alias Daudi. The said death occurred at Sirare village within Kabuchai sub county. The accused denied the offence. 2.During trial, the prosecution called the following witnesses. 1.C.W, aged17 year. She was a daughter to the deceased (PW1). 2.Melvine Musungu (PW2), a niece to the deceased. 3.Inspector Lilian Onsango (PW3), who was the deputy OCS Nalondo police station. 4.Godfrey Simiyu Wamalwa (PW4). He attended the postmortem examination of the deceased’s body on 20/10/2021.He was a brother to the deceased. 5.Redempta Wamalwa (PW5), the mother to the deceased. 6.Beverlyne Orondo (PW6). She was a niece to the deceased. 7.PC. Edward Mulongo formerly of Bungoma police station (PW7). He was the investigating officer in this case. Facts of prosecution’s case 3.The facts of the were that, on 11/10/2021 at about 6.00pm, the deceased returned home with some Sukuma wiki seedlings for planting and proceeded to his mother,Pw5’s house, to request for a jembe so he could plant them. 4.Upon getting to his mother’s house, he asked for a jembe but was denied one. This was because he had failed to return another jembe she had given him earlier. He then left saying that he was going to keep the seedlings and plant them the following day. 5.Subsequently, his father John Wamalwa made a call to somebody and soon thereafter, some commotion ensued outside. That commotion was heard by deceased’s family members who were in the main house having supper. These included PW1, PW2, PW5 and PW6. In response, they all came outside and saw the deceased being beaten with rungus by a group of people who were surrounding him. These were identified to have included the accused person. Others were Nyongesa Zephania and Martin Lusanya. 6.After the incident, the deceased who was by then helpless, was carried into the house where he later succumbed to his injuries about two hours later. 7.Upon the case being reported to the police station, accused was arrested and charged. Incidentally, he was the village elder of the area where the incident occurred. 8.During investigations, the body of the deceased was subjected to postmortem examination and a report filled. It showed that the deceased died due to severe head injury due to blunt brain trauma. The body had swellings, bruises and a puncture wound on the head and arms. Defence case 9.In his defence, accused testified and called one witness namely Patrick Sifuna (DW2). He stated that on 11/10/2021 at about 7. 30p.m, he was in his home when he heard same screams outside. 10.Upon getting outside, he noticed that the screams were emanating from John Wamalwa’s home and was that of his wife Redempta Wamalwa (PW5). He soon proceeded to the scene in the company of one Patrick Sifuna Wasike (DW2). In his possession was a torch and a walking stick. 11.On flashing the torch, saw four (4) people who were all beating the deceased. These included John Wamalwa, the deceased’s father. He was not able to recognize the other three because they were wearing maroon hats. The men had rungus and an iron bar. 12.He intervened and managed to stop the assailants from continuing to assault the deceased further. Present at the scene was PW5 but she was standing a short distance away. 13.After the incident, he made a call to the area chief one Silvester Wasirama and informed him of the same. 14.Later while still at the scene, PW5 confronted him claiming that he was responsible for the deceased’s death; that he had made her husband to attack and kill him. 15.Soon thereafter, people started to pelt him with stones and so he had to escape from there to save himself. 16.Subsequently, him and John Wamalwa as well as Hakin Sikuku were arrested aver the deceased’s death and put in police custody. However, only him was later charged in connection with it. 17.He further explained that the deceased was a known criminal whom he and his men had severally arrested in the past for various offences. These ranged from malicious damage to property, threats to kill and similar offences. They also arrested him over a bhang related offence. As a result, PW5, the mother to the deceased hated him and that was the reason she allegedly singled him out for prosecution over his death. 18.DW2 corroborated his testimony regarding his role in the incident. Issues for determination 19.This being a manslaughter case, the issues for determination will relate to only maters that are in dispute. I note that the attack on the deceased’s death by a mob and his subsequent death are not in dispute. The place of the attack, that ‘locus in quo’ is also not in dispute too. 20.Thereafter matters in dispute are;1.Who attacked the deceased?2.Did his attackers include accused person herein?3.Was the deceased’s death as a result of the injuries that he suffered during he said attack.4.Was his death unlawful.5.Is accused guilty of manslaughter as charged. Determination 21.This offence of manslaughter is outlined under section 202 of the penal code. The same provides that;202(1).Any person who by an unlawful act or emission causes the death of another person is guilty of the felony termed manslaughter. 22.The punishment thereof is outlined under section 205 of the penal code and the same provides thus;“ 205.Any person who commits the felony of manslaughter is liable to imprisonment for life.” 23.From the above provision and in particular section 202 of the penal code, the pre-requisite ingredients to be proved for this case to succeed against accused are that:1.Death of deceased (proof thereof).2.That the said death was unlawful.3.That accused caused the said death with no malice afterthought – see the case of Republic -V- Kebiro (Criminal case E025 OF 2021) (2025) KEHC 19370 (KLR) (30 October 2025) (Judgement) and Republic – V- Hassan Criminal case E006 of 2024) (2026) KEHC 5585 (KLR) (8 April 2026) (Judgement). 24.From these decisions, the deceased’s death, accused’s involvement and the element of the death being devoid of malice aforethought are relevant. The unlawful nature of it, will stem from the manner it was committed by the accused. 25.In this case, accused indicated that when he went to the scene upon hearing screams, he found the deceased being beaten by 4 people who included his own (deceased’s father John Wamalwa. He could not tell who the rest were because of the way they were dressed. He intervened and stopped the attack. This was corroborated by his witness DW2. 26.Clearly, his defence evidence ran counter to that of the prosecution’s witnesses and in particular, the deceased’s relatives. 27.According to them, the deceased was in fact attacked by accused and two other people well known to them. They stated that the accused and his accomplices used rungus to attack the deceased. They allegedly continued the attack until they rendered him wounded and helpless. The above evidence was gathered from PW1, PW2, PW5 and PW6. All of them corroborated each other and confirmed seeing the accused committing or perpetrating the attack on the deceased. 28.First to go outside and notice the attack was the deceased’s daughter PW1. She then alerted the rest who also came outside to witness what was going on. Each of them was quite categorical that accused was amongst the three attackers they saw surrounding and beating the deceased. 29.PW5, added that she even spoke to accused and asked him why he was killing her son. According to her further evidence, accused brushed her off while muttering something to the effect that, he should be left to kill him before continuing with the beatings. When the beatings persisted, the deceased lost consciousness and had to be carried back to the house where he stayed until he died at about 3.00am. 30.From the above evidence, it is my considered view that accused was properly recognized by all the prosecution witnesses aforementioned as one of the three men who personally and directly perpetrated the attack on the deceased. 31.It was stated by some of the witnesses that the deceased’s father made a call to somebody moments before the incident. Soon thereafter, accused and his men arrived and started attacking the deceased. The exact reason for the attack was unclear. What is clear is who were involved. 32.The attackers apparently arrived after the deceased’s father made a call to somebody. From the perspective of the prosecution, those who arrived included accused person herein. 33.But accused shifted blame to the deceased’s own father and three other people who he was unable to identify. He also stated that he was framed up by PW5. He further explained that his role during the incident began and ended at pacifying the attackers. 34.Although his evidence was corroborated by DW2, the court finds that the prosecution adduced overwhelming evidence against him to the contrary. Thus, it is the considered view of the court that accused was properly recognized by all the prosecution witnesses aforementioned as one of the three men who personally and directly perpetrated the attack on the deceased. If it is indeed true that the deceased’s father John Wamalwa was also involved and which is not doubted, he too should be made to face justice by the concerned authorities. Failure to charge him cannot be an excuse for accused or at all. 35.The court has taken note of his sentiments about the said deceased being habitual criminal prior to his death. Even if that was the case, his role in matter should have been to arrest the deceased and hand him to the authorities but not to physically attack his to death. His actions were wrong and unlawful. 36.Having evaluated the evidence carefully, the court finds that the ingredients set out in the case of Republic -V- Kebiro case (supra) were satisfied in this case. In the said case, the court addressed itself on the ingredients of manslaughter as follows; 37.My finding is that while the blow to the head was fatal, the circumstances suggest that the accused did not intend to kill but rather to assault. 38.However, given that the head is a sensitive and delicate part of the body, the accused must have known that such a blow was likely to cause grievous harm.” 39.The court added;------I find that the accused’s act was unlawful and reduced, but the evidence does not demonstrate a clear intention to kill. The appropriate inference is that the accused had the knowledge that his actions were likely to cause grievous harm.“Having carefully considered the evidence and the law, this court finds that the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that;i.Th deceased died as a result of unlawful injury.ii.The injury was inflicted by the accused; andiii.The accused with knowledge that his act was likely to cause grievous harm. 40.Accordingly, I find the accused, Erick Onsinyo Kebira guilty of the offence of manslaughter contrary to section 202 as read with section 205 of the penal code, as the prosecution did not establish malice afterthought requisite for murder.” 41.In this case, it was proved by the prosecution that the deceased succumbed to his beatings and that those beatings were grievous and devoid of any justification. The same were unlawful ab initio. 42.Consequently, the court finds accused person guilty as charged and is convicted of the same under section 215 of the penal code forthwith. HON. R.B.N MALOBA – SPMDATED & DELIVERED IN OPEN COURT THIS 24TH DAY OF JUNE 2026In the presence of;Prosecution- Ms. AchiengC/Asst- Mr. Aggrey/ Ms. JacintaAccused- in personMr. Wamalwa R for accused.R.B.N MALOBA(MS)-SPM