Republic v Zakayo Kipkemei Kiptim [2019] KEHC 2956 (KLR)

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.