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

Republic v Bwanadi Omar Banadi & 1 other

REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT GARSEN CRIMINAL CASE NO 12 OF 2016 REPUBLIC...................................PROSECUTOR VERSUS BWANADI OMAR BANADI.......1ST ACCUSED ABDI ALI MOHAMED.............. 2ND ACCUSED RULING 1. Bwanado Omar Bwanadi (1st Accused) and Abdi Ali Mohamed (2nd Accused) are charged with the offence of murder contrary to section 203 as read with section 204 of the Penal Code, cap 63 Laws of Kenya. 2. The particulars of the offence are that on the 10 th day of June, 2016 at Mbwajumwali village in Lamu East Sub-County within Lamu County jointly murdered Mohamed Shee Mohamed Omar. 3. The prosecution case proceeded before Ongeri J where she heard 8 witnesses before she was transferred to another station. I took over the trial and heard 2 witnesses after the Accused elected to have the matter proceed from where it had reached. At the close of the prosecution case, both the prosecution and defence filed written submissions. 4. I have carefully considered the evidence on record. I have also considered the submissions of the parties. 5. It is my finding that the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the 1st and 2nd accused. Each accused is invited to elect their mode of defence in accordance with section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Orders accordingly. Ruling delivered, dated and signed at Garsen on this 30th day of September, 2019. ........................... R. LAGAT KORIR JUDGE In the presence of: The 1st and 2nd Accused S.Pacho, Court Assistant Mr. Nyongesa h/b for Mr. Gekanana for 1st &2nd Accused Mr. Mwangi for the Respondent

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.