[2019] KEHC 2956 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against the accused, meaning that the evidence presented, if left unchallenged, could result in a conviction. Therefore, the accused is required to be put on his defence in accordance with section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The court...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEHC 2956 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Zakayo Kipkemei Kiptim
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kabarnet
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 65 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer
- Outcome
- The accused is found to have a case to answer and is called upon to enter his defence.
- Judges
- EM Muriithi
- Legal Topics
- 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
Zakayo Kipkemei Kiptim
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 sufficient to require him to enter a defence.
- 2 Whether the evidence presented, if unchallenged, could lead to a conviction.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against the accused, meaning that the evidence presented, if left unchallenged, could result in a conviction. Therefore, the accused is required to be put on his defence in accordance with section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The court refrained from discussing the merits of the evidence in detail to avoid prejudicing the accused's right to a fair trial.
Court Disposition
The accused is found to have a case to answer and is called upon to enter his defence.
Orders
- The accused shall be called to his defence in accordance with section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
18 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT KABARNET
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 65 OF 2017
REPUBLIC.............................................................PROSECUTOR
=VERSUS=
ZAKAYO KIPKEMEI KIPTIM..................................ACCUSED
RULING ON CASE TO ANSWER
1. I have considered that a trial Court is under a duty, as held by the Court of Appeal in Murimi v. R (1967) EA 542, to acquit an accused if the Prosecution “failed to make out a case sufficient to require the accused to enter a defence” and further that such a case is made out when a prima facie case is established being “one on which a reasonable tribunal properly directing its mind to the law and the evidence could convict if no explanation is offered by the defence.”See Ramanlal T. Bhatt v. R (1957) EA 332, 335.
2. However, the evidence presented by the Prosecution, without exhaustive discussion of the merits so as not to prejudice the fair trial of the case as counseled by Kibera Karimi v. R (1979) KLR 36, and Festo Wandera Mukando v. R (1976 – 80) KLR 1626, 1631, I find that the Prosecution has established a prima facie case.
3. The accused will be called to his defence in accordance with section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Order accordingly.
DATED AND DELIVERED THIS 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2019.
EDWARD M. MURIITHI
JUDGE
Appearances:
M/S Terer & Co. Advocates for the Accused.
Ms. Macharia, Ass. DPP, Counsel for the State.