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

State v Wycliffe Otieno Onani Alias Awiko

State v Onani alias Awiko (Criminal Case E031 of 2022) [2024] KEHC 1375 (KLR) (15 February 2024) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 1375 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT SIAYA CRIMINAL CASE E031 OF 2022 DO OGEMBO, J FEBRUARY 15, 2024 BETWEEN STATE ................................................................................................... PROSECUTION AND WYCLIFFE OTIENO ONANI ALIAS AWIKO ......................................... ACCUSED RULING 1. The Prosecution herein called a total of 9 witnesses who have given evidence in support of the charge herein. At the close of the Prosecution’s case, neither the defence nor the Prosecution sides have made any submissions as to whether a prima facie case has been established against the accused. I have accordingly considered the evidence of the 9 prosecution witnesses and guided by the authority in Ramanlal Bhatt v R (1957)EA, I am satisfied that a prima facie case has been established against the accused. I accordingly find that accused has a case to answer and I put him to his own defence. DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT SIAYA THIS 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024 D.O. OGEMBO JUDGE 15.2.2024 Court: Ruling read out in Open court in presence of accused, Mr. Okanda for accused and Ms. Mumu for State. D.O. OGEMBO JUDGE 15.2.2024 Court: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2024/1375/eng@2024-02-15 1

page 1 of 2

Matter fixed for Defence hearing. Defence hearing on 21-5-2024. D.O. OGEMBO JUDGE 15.2.2024 https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2024/1375/eng@2024-02-15 2

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.