[2025] KEHC 3622 (KLR)
The court found that the prosecution's evidence, particularly the testimony of the deceased's wife (PW5) placing both accused at the scene of the assault, was sufficient to establish a prima facie case of murder against Fabian Owiti Miruka and Victor Odhiambo Miruka. The court held that, if the accused elected to...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEHC 3622 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: State; Defendant: Fabian Owiti Miruka; Defendant: Victor Odhiambo Miruka
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Siaya
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case (MURDER) E021 ‘A’ of 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Case to Answer
- Outcome
- Accused found to have a case to answer; called upon to make their defence.
- Judges
- DK Kemei
- 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
State
Applicant
Fabian Owiti Miruka
Defendant
Victor Odhiambo Miruka
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 persons to warrant them being put on their defence.
- 2 Whether the evidence adduced places the accused at the scene of the crime and links them to the offence of murder.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the prosecution's evidence, particularly the testimony of the deceased's wife (PW5) placing both accused at the scene of the assault, was sufficient to establish a prima facie case of murder against Fabian Owiti Miruka and Victor Odhiambo Miruka. The court held that, if the accused elected to remain silent, the evidence on record could sustain a conviction. Accordingly, the accused were found to have a case to answer and were called upon to make their defence in accordance with section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Court Disposition
Accused found to have a case to answer; called upon to make their defence.
Orders
- Both Fabian Owiti Miruka and Victor Odhiambo Miruka are found to have a case to answer and are called upon to make their defence in accordance with section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
State v Miruka & another (Criminal Case (MURDER) E021 ‘A’ of 2022) [2025] KEHC 3622 (KLR) (24 March 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 3622 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Siaya
Criminal Case (MURDER) E021 ‘A’ of 2022
DK Kemei, J
March 24, 2025
Between
State
Prosecution
and
Fabian Owiti Miruka
1st Accused
Victor Odhiambo Miruka
2nd Accused
Ruling
1. Both accused herein Fabian Owiti Miruka and Victor Odhiambo Miruka have been charged with an offence of murder contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code. The particulars are that on 25th day of April 2021 at Bar Kowino Sub-Location, in Bondo Township Location, Bondo Sub County within Siaya County, jointly with others not before court, murdered one Stephen Oyugi Rajula.
2. The prosecution called six (6) witnesses in support of its case.
3. At this stage of the proceedings, the prosecution is under a duty to establish a prima facie case against both accused persons so as to warrant them to be called upon to make a defence. A prima facie case is one in which a reasonable tribunal directing its mind to the law and evidence placed before it can convict an accused in the absence of evidence to the contrary by the defence. In a nutshell, the evidence so far tendered by the prosecution at this stage of the proceedings should be sufficient to convict both accused were they to elect to remain silent in defence. See BHATT VS. R [1957] EA 334.
4. It is trite that a trial court while making a determination on whether an accused person has a case to answer is expected to be circumspect so as to ensure that it does not prejudice the defence. In the present case, it was the evidence of PW5 who is the wife of the deceased and who testified that she was with her husband when the two accused persons herein together with another whom she did not know assaulted her husband. It was the evidence of PW1 that the deceased rushed to him for help and that the said PW1 assisted him to hospital. The deceased died while undergoing treatment. Going by the evidence of PW5, it is clear that the accused persons were placed at the scene of crime and therefore they must now offer an explanation as to how the deceased met his death.
5. In the result, it is my finding that the prosecution has established a prima facie case against both accused herein to require them to make a defence. Consequently, I find Fabian Owiti Miruka and Victor Odhiambo Miruka have a case to answer. They are now called upon to elect to conduct their defence in accordance with the provisions of section 306 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
DATED AND DELIVERED AT SIAYA THIS 24THDAY OF MARCH, 2025. D. KEMEIJUDGE
In the presence of:Fabian Owiti Miruka……1stAccusedVictor Odhiambo Miruka…….2ndAccusedOduor for Mshindi………for both AccusedSoita……………for ProsecutionMboya………………Court Assistant