REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT VOI CRIMINAL CASE NO 6 OF 2015 REPUBLIC VERSUS VINCENT MAGANGA MWASIGHWA……………………...1ST ACCUSED PERSON RICHARD NYAMBU MWANDOE…………….………….…2ND ACCUSED PERSON DONCIA WAKESHO MGHANDA…………………………..3RD ACCUSED PERSON RULING 1. On 17th November 2016, the Prosecution closed its case after calling a total of six (6) Prosecution witnesses. 2. The court directed counsel for the State and counsel for the Accused persons to file their respective Written Submissions on the question of whether or not the Accused persons had a case to answer. The Accused persons filed their Written Submissions dated 29th November 2016 on even date while the State filed its Written Submissions dated 13th December 2016 on 14th December 2016. 3. When the matter came up in court on 15 th December 2016, this court reserved the Ruling as to whether or not the 1st and 3rd Accused persons had a case to answer to 15 th February 2017. Having noted from the proceedings that there was no evidence linking the 2nd Accused person to the offence whatsoever, this court recorded a finding of “Not Guilty” as against the 2 nd Accused person. This was in line with the provisions of Section 306(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code Cap 75 (Laws of Kenya). 4. Accordingly, having carefully considered the evidence by the Prosecution witnesses and the Written Submissions by counsel for the Accused persons and counsel for the State, the court was of the opinion that a prima facie case had been established against the 1st and 3rdAccused persons to warrant them being put on their Defence. They are hereby put on their defence. 5. It is so ordered. DATED and DELIVERED at VOI this 15th day of February 2017 J. KAMAU JUDGE In the presence of:Miss Anyumba……………………………………………………. for State Were…………………………………..……………………for Accused persons Josephat Mavu– Court Clerk
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.