[2019] KEHC 6094 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution's evidence, including the accused's possession of a blood-stained T-shirt, the deceased's radio, and the deceased's phone, was sufficient to establish a prima facie case of murder against the accused. The court held that these facts required the accused to answer or explain his...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEHC 6094 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Respondent: Wesley Patrick Eyanae
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 11 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer Under Section 306(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code
- Outcome
- accused found to have a case to answer and placed on his defence
- Judges
- JK Mulwa
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Prima Facie Case, Case to Answer, 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
Wesley Patrick Eyanae
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer Under Section 306(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the accused to warrant placing him on his defence.
- 2 Whether the evidence adduced links the accused to the murder of Gilbert Kipyegon Koech.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution's evidence, including the accused's possession of a blood-stained T-shirt, the deceased's radio, and the deceased's phone, was sufficient to establish a prima facie case of murder against the accused. The court held that these facts required the accused to answer or explain his possession of these items and the circumstances surrounding the murder. Accordingly, the court was satisfied that the accused had a case to answer and ordered that he be placed on his defence in accordance with Section 306(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Court Disposition
accused found to have a case to answer and placed on his defence
Orders
- The accused is found to have a case to answer and shall be placed on his defence.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT
ATNAKURU
CRIMINAL CASE (MURDER)NO. 11 OF 2018
REPUBLIC........................................PROSECUTOR
-VERSUS-
WESLEY PATRICK EYANAE......RESPONDENT
RULING
(Under Section 306(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code, Cap 75 Laws of Kenya)
The accused is charged with the offence of Murder of one Gilbert Kipyegon Koech on the 2nd February 2018 at Umoja Location in Rongai Sub-County within Nakuru County. He pleaded not guilty.
The prosecution called 9(nine) witnesses to prove that it is the accused who murdered the deceased.
I have examined their evidence.
PW1 testified to have found the accused’s T-shirt with blood stains in the morning after the murder. She was the wife of the accused. He could not explain to her the origin of the blood nor presence of a radio, the deceased’s property in his house.
PW4 testified to have sold a telephone hand set to the deceased on the 1st February 2018 a day before his death. This phone set was found in the possession of the accused on the day the deceased was found dead. He testified to have seen the police remove the said phone from the accused’s pocket on the day of his arrest.
Section 306(1) and (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code provides that if the court is satisfied that the evidence adduced by the prosecution witnesses establishes a prima facie case against the accused, it makes a finding that there is a case to answer, and calls upon such accused person to defend himself by either unsworn or sworn evidence – Criminal Case No.18 of 2015 R -vs- Alex Mwanzia Mutangili (2017) e KLR.
However, if no sufficient evidence is called to establish a prima facie case, the court enters a finding of not guilty and acquits the accused.
See R.T. Bhatt –vs- R (1957) EA 332 – 334.
For the court to call upon the accused to answer to the charge of murder, the evidence adduced should be able to prove the ingredients of the offence, but mere scintilla of evidence or suspicion will not be enough.
In the instance case, the accused ought to answer or explain presence of blood stains in his shirt and possession of the deceased’s telephone handset in the morning of the murder, among other allegations.
The upshot is that the court is satisfied that the accused has a case to answer. He shall thus be placed on his defence.
It is so ordered.
Dated, delivered and signed at Nakuru this 18th Day of June 2019.
J.N. MULWA
JUDGE