Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Original judgment

Republic v Peter Macharia Karanja

REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAKURU CRIMINAL CASE NO. 73 OF 2013 REPUBLIC................................................PROSECUTOR VERSUS PETER MACHARIA KARANJA......................ACCUSED JUDGMENT The accused PETER MACHARIA KARANJA faces a charge of MURDER CONTRARY TO SECTION 203 as read with SECTION 204 OF THE PENAL CODE. The particulars of the charge were that “Between 21st and 22nd July, 2013 at Kabati Estate in Naivasha Municipality of Nakuru County, murdered Jacinta Muthoni Kihiu”. The accused pleaded ‘Not Guilty’ to the charge. The accused was first arraigned before the High Court at Nakuru on 1 st August 2013. His trial did not commence until 19th May, 2015 when one witness LUCY WAIRIMU KIHIU testified. Thereafter the prosecution did not avail any other prosecution witness. On 19/11/2016 the court gave a final adjournment. On the next hearing date of 15/12/2016 no prosecution witness was availed and the prosecution had no option but to close their case. It goes without saying that no prima facie case has been established. The calling of a single witness would hardly suffice to prove so serious a charge as murder. No doctor testified on the cause of death. No postmortem report was produced. The prosecution case fell way short of proving a ‘prima facie’ case. I enter a verdict of ‘Not Guilty’ and I acquit the accused of this charge of murder. The accused is to be set at liberty forthwith unless he is otherwise lawfully held. Dated and Delivered in Nakuru this 10th day of February, 2017. Mr. Khatiri for Accused Mr. Chigiti for State Maureen A. Odero Judge

A note on accuracy. These pages are generated automatically from our AI-written case briefs and have not been checked by a lawyer. Case titles and citations come from Kenya Law; the counts, topics, propositions and “treatment” labels are derived from the briefs and can be incomplete or wrong. Use them as a research aid and always read the original judgment before relying on anything here. This is not legal advice.