Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Kenya decisions
Decisions matching the current search
On first appeal, the High Court at Marsabit upheld a conviction for defilement of a 17-year-old, finding penetration, age and identification proved beyond reasonable doubt, and upheld the statutory 15-year sentence.
The High Court dismissed an appeal against conviction and sentence for defilement of a 15-year-old, holding that age, penetration and identification were proved and that paternity and DNA evidence are not elements of the offence.
Mwita v Republic (Criminal Appeal E080 of 2023) [2026] KECA 1409 (KLR) (10 July 2026) (Judgment)
The Court held that the prosecution proved all the ingredients of defilement: the complainant’s age was established by a birth certificate, penetration by the complainant’s testimony and medical evidence showing a freshly broken hymen and linear cuts, and identity by the complainant’s evidence corroborated by PW4. The Court further held that the appellant’s constitutional complaints were not raised before the first appellate court, the record showed he was supplied with witness statements and informed of his right to counsel, and no violation of Article 50 or section 213 of the Criminal Proce…
Source excerpt
Wanyonyi v ODPP (Criminal Appeal E152 of 2024) [2026] KEHC 10352 (KLR) (7 July 2026) (Judgment)
The appeal failed because the complainant's evidence, medical evidence, and surrounding testimony sufficiently proved the appellant's guilt for defilement; the alleged inconsistencies were immaterial, the complainant was not properly established as a hostile witness, voir dire did not vitiate the evidence, and DNA testing was not mandatory where the evidence already established penetration and identification beyond reasonable doubt.
Source excerpt
Republic v Njuki & another (Criminal Case E032 of 2022) [2026] KEHC 11652 (KLR) (1 July 2026) (Ruling)
The prosecution evidence from Pw1 and Pw2 placed both accused persons at the scene and connected them to the assault on the deceased, whose death was later caused by injuries sustained in that attack. The court was satisfied that the evidence established a prima facie case of murder and required the accused persons to answer the charge on their defence.
Source excerpt
Republic v Matere (Criminal Case E109 of 2026) [2026] KEMC 262 (KLR) (30 June 2026) (Judgment)
The prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was armed with dangerous weapons and engaged in overt conduct—cutting the fence, entering the premises, and moving toward the solar panel control box—that amounted to preparation to commit stealing, thereby satisfying section 308(1) of the Penal Code.
Source excerpt
Republic v Ndambuki (Criminal Case E010 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 9463 (KLR) (30 June 2026) (Judgment)
The prosecution proved that the deceased died from unlawful head injury, but failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused caused the death. The alleged identification of the accused as 'Junior' was not adequately established, the supposed dying declaration was not reliable or corroborated, no eyewitness placed the accused at the scene, and the investigation was incomplete. On that evidence, the court could not safely convict for murder.
Source excerpt
Republic v Ndungu (Criminal Case E075 of 2021) [2026] KEHC 9844 (KLR) (Crim) (18 June 2026) (Ruling)
The court held that the prosecution evidence, taken at face value, proved the death of the deceased, indicated an unlawful stabbing to the chest, linked the accused to the stabbing through the deceased’s dying declaration and subsequent identification evidence, and therefore disclosed a prima facie case requiring the accused to be placed on his defence.
Source excerpt
Ombura v Republic (Criminal Appeal E135 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 8546 (KLR) (18 June 2026) (Judgment)
The complainant credibly identified the appellant as her uncle and as the person who repeatedly had sexual intercourse with her; medical evidence supported penetration, DNA evidence linked the appellant to the complainant’s child, and the birth certificate proved the complainant was a minor. The prosecution therefore proved incest beyond reasonable doubt, so the conviction was lawful and the appeal failed.
Source excerpt
Wanjala v Republic (Criminal Appeal E062 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 10581 (KLR) (9 June 2026) (Judgment)
The High Court found that the complainant's testimony, supported by medical evidence and proof of age, established the ingredients of defilement; the alleged contradictions were immaterial, additional witnesses were peripheral, the one-day delay in arraignment caused no demonstrated prejudice, the absence of a birth-certificate disclosure complaint at trial was fatal to that ground, medical examination of the appellant was not required by law, mitigation was in fact recorded, and the trial court correctly analyzed the evidence. The appeal therefore failed in its entirety.
Source excerpt
Explore more
