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

Republic v Julius Nkunja

REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU CRIMINAL CASE NO. 34 OF 2016 REPUBLIC.........................................................PROSECUTOR VS JULIUS NKUNJA......................................................ACCUSED RULING The accused Julius Nkunja was charged with the offence of Murder contrary to section 203 as read with section 204 of the Penal code. Particulars are that Julius Nkunja on 20th day of February 2016 at around 2.00 pm at Kiinjo sublocation, Katheri East Location in Imenti Central within Meru County murdered Stephen Mbaya Mwirebua. The Prosecution called PW7 Dr. Maria Muthoni Mwangi who produced PM Report prepared by Dr. Brian Bett who carried out autopsy on the body of the deceased confirming death was caused by excessive bleeding from a cut on the frontal side of the head. PW1 the father of the deceased PW2 the wife of the deceased and pW4 the Mother of the deceased saw accussed inflict injuries on the deceased with a fork jembe which led to his death. The evidence of the doctor and the 3 witnesses together with evidence of Investigating officer PW6 and PW5 who took the deceased to hospital makes this court find that prosecution has raised a prima facie case sufficient to place accused on his defence. He has a case to answer. HON. A.ONG’INJO JUDGE 6.12.2018 Before Adwera Ong’injo J Kinoti –C/A Mrs Mwathi for state Mr Frank Gitonga Advocate for accused – Mr Kaumbi holding brief Accused – present in person Court RULING DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED THIS 6TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018 Section 211 C.P.C explained to accused how to defend himself and he replies:Accused:

page 1 of 2

Sworn evidence No witnesses. Order Dhg 24.1.2019 Accused Bond extended. HON. A.ONG’INJO JUDGE

page 2 of 2

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.