[2019] KEHC 8929 (KLR)
The court found that the circumstantial evidence, particularly the testimony of PW2 placing the 1st accused at the scene with the deceased and holding an iron rod, established a prima facie case against the 1st accused. The altercation between the 1st accused and the deceased prior to her death, and the absence of...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEHC 8929 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Zacharia Kipsielo Rono; Defendant: Rosalyne Chepngetich Tanui
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Murder Case 18 of 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Murder / Ruling on Case to Answer and Acquittal at Close of Prosecution Case
- Outcome
- 1st accused found to have a case to answer; 2nd accused acquitted under Section 306(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
- Judges
- JK Mulwa
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Prima Facie Case, Acquittal, Circumstantial Evidence
- 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
Zacharia Kipsielo Rono
Defendant
Rosalyne Chepngetich Tanui
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Murder / Ruling on Case to Answer and Acquittal at Close of Prosecution Case
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a prima facie case has been established against the 1st accused for the offence of murder.
- 2 Whether the 2nd accused should be put on her defence or acquitted at this stage.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the circumstantial evidence, particularly the testimony of PW2 placing the 1st accused at the scene with the deceased and holding an iron rod, established a prima facie case against the 1st accused. The altercation between the 1st accused and the deceased prior to her death, and the absence of other adults at the scene, further supported the need for the 1st accused to explain the circumstances of the death. In contrast, there was no evidence, direct or circumstantial, implicating the 2nd accused in the commission of the offence. The court held that mere suspicion was insufficient to require the 2nd accused to be put on her defence and accordingly acquitted her under...
Court Disposition
1st accused found to have a case to answer; 2nd accused acquitted under Section 306(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Orders
- 1st accused to be put on his defence to explain the circumstances of the deceased's death.
- 2nd accused is acquitted and discharged under Section 306(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT ATNAKURU
CRIMINAL (MURDER) CASENO. 18 OF 2016
REPUBLIC...............................................................PROSECUTOR
-VERSUS-
ZACHARIA KIPSIELO RONO..............................1ST ACCUSED
ROSALYNE CHEPNGETICH TANUI..................2ND ACCUSED
RULING
The accused persons were on the 27th March 2016 charged with the offence of Murder Contrary to Section 204 of the Penal Code. The victim of the Murder Esther Chepkoech Langat was wife to the 1st accused and mother to the 2nd accused.
The deceased met her death at her homestead. The only people who were present were the husband – 1st accused, Rosaline Chepngetich Tanui – 2nd Accused, and PW2 son of the deceased.
PW2 placed the 1st accused at the scene of crime whereof he testified having found his father – 1st accused stepping on the deceased body outside the house holding an iron rode. He however did not see his father commit the crime.
None of the four witnesses pointed to the 2nd accused as having participated in the commission of the offence though she was within the homestead.
It is worth to note that prior to the death the 1st accused and the deceased had an altercation upon which the 1st accused is alleged to have thrown the deceased outside the house where the assault took place.
The 2nd accused remained inside the house all the time.
Upon the above circumstantial evidence, a prima facie case has been established against the 1st accused to warrant him explain the circumstances leading to the deceased death.
I therefore find that the 1st accused has a case to answer to explain how the deceased died and who inflicted the fatal blow on her head with a blunt object.
As for the 2nd accused, it is my finding that no prima facie case has been established against her.
Suspicion alone cannot be a basis for requiring an accused person to explain and answer to a charge of murder. She is acquitted the under the provisions of Section 306(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Dated, signed and delivered this 28th Day of March 2019.
J.N. MULWA
JUDGE