[2022] KEHC 717 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against the accused by presenting evidence sufficient to meet the threshold required at this stage of the proceedings. The court considered the elements of murder as set out in the Penal Code and determined that the evidence, if unchallenged,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEHC 717 (KLR)
- Parties
- Respondent: Republic; Defendant: Weldon Kipyegon Langat
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Bomet
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 8 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer
- Outcome
- accused found to have a case to answer; called upon to make defence
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Prima Facie Case, Malice Aforethought, Criminal 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
Respondent
Weldon Kipyegon Langat
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer
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 establishes the elements of murder as defined under the Penal Code.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against the accused by presenting evidence sufficient to meet the threshold required at this stage of the proceedings. The court considered the elements of murder as set out in the Penal Code and determined that the evidence, if unchallenged, would warrant a conviction. In line with established judicial practice, the court refrained from detailed analysis or definitive findings to avoid prejudicing the defence. Consequently, the accused was called upon to elect the mode of his defence in accordance with Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Court Disposition
accused found to have a case to answer; called upon to make defence
Orders
- The accused is found to have a case to answer and is called upon to elect the mode of his defence in accordance with Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT BOMET
CRIMINAL CASE NUMBER 8 OF 2018
REPUBLIC .............................................................. PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
WELDON KIPYEGON LANGAT..................................ACCUSED
RULING
1. The Accused was charged with the offence of murder contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code. The particulars of the charge were that on the 9th day of June, 2018 at Emitiot Sub-Location, Cheboin Location within Bomet County, murdered one Wesley Kiprono Langat.
2. He pleaded not guilty to the charge, and the trial proceeded before Muya J, who heard prosecution witnesses. I took over the case and heard only one witness, the investigating officer.
3. At this stage of the proceedings all that the court is required to do is to consider whether a prima facie case has been established by the prosecution. In doing this, the court must consider the evidence against the elements of the offence which are: -
(i) The death of the deceased occurred;
(ii) That the accused committed the unlawful act which caused the death of the deceased; and
(iii) That the accused had malice aforethought.
4. Further the court is not required, if it is going to put the accused on his defence, to give a detailed analysis of the evidence. I agree with the reasoning of Odunga J, in the case of Republic V Robert Zippor Nzilu (2020) eKLR, where he explained that: -
“That there is a danger in making definitive findings at this stage, especially where the Court finds that there is a case to answer is not farfetched and the reasons for not doing so are obvious. As was appreciated by Trevelyan and Chesoni, JJ in Festo Wandera Mukando VS. The Republic (1980) KLR 103:
“we once more draw attention to the inadvisability of giving reasons for holding that an accused has a case to answer. It can prove embarrassing to the court and, in an extreme case, may require an appellate court to set aside an otherwise sound judgement. Where a submission of “no case” is rejected, the court should say no more than that it is. It is otherwise where the submission is upheld when reasons should be given; for then that is the end to the case or the count or countsconcerned.”
5. I have considered the evidence before me and the Prosecution’s submissions dated 10th March,2022. I am satisfied, without delving further into the evidence, that the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the Accused.
6. It is my finding that the accused person has a case to answer. He is called upon to elect the mode of his defence in accordance with Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Orders accordingly.
Ruling delivered, dated and signed at Bomet this 28th day of April, 2022.
..........................
R. LAGAT-KORIR
JUDGE
Ruling delivered in the presence of Mr. Kipngetich for the Accused, Ms. Boyon holding brief for Mr Muriithi for the state and Kiprotich (Court Assistant).