REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KAKAMEGA CRIMINAL CASE NO. 59 OF 2009 REPUBLIC........................................DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS VERSUS PETER MUHATI ONDUSI......................................................................ACCUSED RULING 1. Although I had allocated this matter a date for judgement, I have gone through the record and established that it ought to come up for a ruling on whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case, sufficient to have accused should be put on his defence. 2. I have guidance from Ramanlal Trambaklal Bhatt vs. R (1957) EA 332, where the court describes a prima facie case as one in which a reasonable tribunal, properly directing its mind to the law and the evidence, could convict, if no explanation was offered by the defence. Director of Public Prosecutions vs. Geoffrey Mukonza Mwangangi [2018] eKLR and Frankline Muthoka Mumo vs. Republic [2019] eKLR are in similar vein. 3. I have gone through the record before me, principally the testimonies of PW1, PW2, PW3 and PW4, and I am persuaded that the prosecution has adduced evidence which establishes a prima facie case against the accused person, and I hereby find that the accused has a case to answer, and I shall, accordingly, put him on his defence. DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED IN OPEN COURT AT KAKAMEGA THIS 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 W MUSYOKA 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.