Esheria Kenya Case Law
Sign in
Kenya Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

Kenya Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
2 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter Kenya case law

Results update automatically as you type.

Kenya decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Criminal law [2026] KECA 1641 (KLR)

Shimole v Republic

Shimole v Republic (Criminal Appeal E013 of 2025) [2026] KECA 1641 (KLR) (31 July 2026) (Judgment)

Court
Court of Appeal
Case number
Criminal Appeal E013 of 2025
Judge
["F Tuiyott", "MN Nduma", "M Sila"]

The Court upheld the conviction because PW1 and PW2 were consistent and credible eyewitnesses who placed the appellant at the scene, described him drawing a knife and stabbing the deceased, and no evidence showed any motive to fabricate. The defence that the appellant was attacked was an afterthought, the absence of the murder weapon did not weaken the case because the appellant fled with it, and malice aforethought was proved by the deliberate armed stabbing. The sentence was also upheld because the trial court considered relevant factors, including mitigation, the pre-sentence report and ti…

Source excerpt

  • Murder
  • Malice aforethought
  • First appellate re-evaluation of evidence
  • Eyewitness testimony
  • Circumstantial and direct evidence
  • Identification of deceased at post-mortem
Read case analysis
Criminal law [2026] KEHC 12397 (KLR)

Republic v Chonge

Republic v Chonge (Criminal Case E017 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 12397 (KLR) (29 July 2026) (Judgment)

Court
High Court
Case number
Criminal Case E017 of 2025
Judge
["REA Ougo"]

The court found that the deceased died from severe blunt-force head trauma and that PW1, PW2 and PW4, all of whom knew the accused well, consistently placed him at the scene before, during and immediately after the assault. The maize plantation did not defeat recognition evidence, the alibi was displaced, absence of motive was immaterial, and the nature of the repeated attacks on the head with a hoe and timber established malice aforethought. The prosecution therefore proved murder beyond reasonable doubt.

Source excerpt

  • Murder
  • Identification and recognition evidence
  • Malice aforethought
  • Alibi defence
  • Circumstantial and direct evidence
  • Post-mortem evidence
Read case analysis
Criminal law [2026] KEHC 11663 (KLR)

Republic v Amadi

Republic v Amadi (Criminal Case E019 of 2024) [2026] KEHC 11663 (KLR) (28 July 2026) (Judgment)

Court
High Court
Case number
Criminal Case E019 of 2024
Judge
["RN Nyakundi"]

The prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused unlawfully caused the deceased’s fatal head injury, but failed to prove malice aforethought beyond reasonable doubt given the spontaneous, drunken, single-blow bar-room fracas; the proper verdict was manslaughter under Section 179 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Source excerpt

  • Murder
  • Manslaughter
  • Malice aforethought
  • Circumstantial and direct evidence
  • Single witness evidence
  • Admissibility/weight of altered documents
Read case analysis
Criminal law [2026] KEHC 12523 (KLR)

Republic v Nyale

Republic v Nyale (Criminal Case E020 of 2020) [2026] KEHC 12523 (KLR) (24 July 2026) (Judgment)

Court
High Court
Case number
Criminal Case E020 of 2020
Judge
["WM Kagendo."]

The prosecution proved that the deceased died from a stab wound severing the trachea, that the accused was the person who inflicted the fatal injury through direct, corroborated eyewitness evidence, and that the circumstances of the attack established malice aforethought. The accused's self-defence claim was rejected because the evidence showed he left, returned later, and launched the fatal attack without any imminent threat.

Source excerpt

  • Murder
  • Malice aforethought
  • Proof beyond reasonable doubt
  • Circumstantial and direct evidence
  • Self-defence
  • Post-mortem evidence
Read case analysis
Criminal law [2026] KEHC 10415 (KLR)

Republic v Kipchirchir

Republic v Kipchirchir (Criminal Case E030 of 2020) [2026] KEHC 10415 (KLR) (13 July 2026) (Ruling)

Court
High Court
Case number
Criminal Case E030 of 2020
Judge
["JK Sergon"]

The prosecution adduced direct eyewitness evidence, corroborated by forensic and medical evidence, showing the death of the deceased, the accused's involvement, and malice aforethought; therefore a reasonable tribunal could convict if the accused offered no explanation, so the accused had a case to answer and had to be put on his defence under section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Source excerpt

  • Murder
  • Prima facie case
  • Case to answer
  • Identification evidence
  • Malice aforethought
  • Section 306 criminal procedure code
Read case analysis
Criminal law [2026] KEHC 11232 (KLR)

Republic v Lekachuma

Republic v Lekachuma (Criminal Case E026 of 2022) [2026] KEHC 11232 (KLR) (9 July 2026) (Judgment)

Court
High Court
Case number
Criminal Case E026 of 2022
Judge
["JM Nang'ea"]

The court held that the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused shot the unarmed deceased in the chest, causing death, and that the account of self-defence was displaced by the direct evidence of PW4 and PW7, the surrounding circumstances, and the nature of the fatal injury. Malice aforethought was therefore inferred from the deliberate use of a firearm aimed at a vital body part.

Source excerpt

  • Murder
  • Malice aforethought
  • Self-defence
  • Circumstantial and direct evidence
  • Firearms evidence
  • Post-mortem evidence
Read case analysis
Criminal law [2026] KEHC 9878 (KLR)

Republic v Kamau

Republic v Kamau (Criminal Case 89 of 2014) [2026] KEHC 9878 (KLR) (3 July 2026) (Judgment)

Court
High Court
Case number
Criminal Case 89 of 2014
Judge
["JRA Wananda"]

The court held that the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused, who was recognized by a neighbour in broad daylight and whose involvement was corroborated by other witnesses and by the accused's own admissions about the confrontation, stabbed the deceased and caused his death. The court further held that malice aforethought was established because the accused stabbed the deceased twice, including on the chest, using a knife or sharp object, causing a fatal penetrating wound to the heart, which showed intention to cause death or grievous harm. The defence was rejected as a…

Source excerpt

  • Murder
  • Malice aforethought
  • Identification by recognition
  • Circumstantial and direct evidence
  • Burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt
  • Self-defence claim rejected
Read case analysis
Criminal law [2026] KEHC 9352 (KLR)

Republic v Nduati

Republic v Nduati (Criminal Case E034 of 2021) [2026] KEHC 9352 (KLR) (30 June 2026) (Judgment)

Court
High Court
Case number
Criminal Case E034 of 2021
Judge
["FR Olel"]

The prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused stabbed the deceased four times in broad daylight, causing fatal internal injuries, and the surrounding evidence, including eyewitness testimony and post-offence admissions by text and phone, established malice aforethought. The accused raised no credible insanity defence and the presumption of sanity was not displaced.

Source excerpt

  • Murder
  • Malice aforethought
  • Identification by single eyewitness
  • Circumstantial and direct evidence
  • Post-mortem evidence
  • Insanity presumption
Read case analysis
Criminal law [2026] KECA 1221 (KLR)

Tonui v Republic

Tonui v Republic (Criminal Appeal 25 of 2019) [2026] KECA 1221 (KLR) (26 June 2026) (Judgment)

Court
Court of Appeal
Case number
Criminal Appeal 25 of 2019
Judge
["JM Mativo", "PM Gachoka", "BM Kairaria"]

The Court of Appeal held that PW2's evidence was not contradictory or unreliable, that the appellant was properly recognized in daylight at close range by a witness who knew him well, that the prosecution proved murder beyond reasonable doubt, and that the severe, repeated neck injuries established malice aforethought; accordingly the conviction and 30-year sentence were upheld.

Source excerpt

  • Murder
  • Recognition evidence
  • Single eyewitness testimony
  • Malice aforethought
  • Burden and standard of proof
  • First appellate review
Read case analysis
Criminal law [2026] KEHC 12645 (KLR)

Republic v Chengo & 2 others

Republic v Chengo & 2 others (Criminal Case E035 of 2021) [2026] KEHC 12645 (KLR) (25 June 2026) (Judgment)

Court
High Court
Case number
Criminal Case E035 of 2021
Judge
["WM Kagendo."]

The court found that the accused jointly pursued and assaulted the deceased as part of one continuous unlawful transaction, and that the 3rd accused’s use of the mattock was a foreseeable escalation of that common assault. Because the 1st and 2nd accused actively participated and did not withdraw, Section 21 of the Penal Code fixed them with equal liability for the fatal act. The violent targeting of the head with a mattock established malice aforethought.

Source excerpt

  • Murder
  • Manslaughter plea bargain
  • Common intention
  • Malice aforethought
  • Identification by recognition
  • Burden of proof
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

Kenya decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.