Republic v Julius Kipkemboi Kiplangat

Republic v Kiplangat (Criminal Case 24 of 2020) [2024] KEHC 16139 (KLR) (19 December 2024) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 16139 (KLR) REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT AT NAKURU CRIMINAL CASE 24 OF 2020 JM NANG'EA, J DECEMBER 19, 2024 BETWEEN REPUBLIC ........................................................................................... PROSECUTION AND JULIUS KIPKEMBOI KIPLANGAT ........................................................... ACCUSED RULING 1. The accused is charged with Murder Contary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code. The particulars of the offence state that on 9th May 2020 at Upper Rongai Village in Ol-Rongai Location, Rongai Sub-County, within Nakuru County he murdered William Kipkemboi Tomno. The accused entered plea of “Not Guilty”. 2. I have perused the evidence adduced by witnesses for the prosecution and note that the defence Counsel chose not to offer Submissons “on no case to answer”. At this stage, the prosecution is required to make out a prima facie case warranting putting of the accused on his defence. In the famous case of Ramanlal T. Bhatt vs Republic, a prima facie case was defined as one in which the court could convict if no defence is offered by the accused. That is not to say, however, that the court will be prepared to convit in every case where the accused fails to give defence. The decision of the court depends on the facts and circumstances of each case while taking into account that the accused has the Constitutional right to remain silent. 3. Having so observed, I find that the prosecution has made out a prima facie case and the accused is hereby put on his defence. It is established Judicial practice that no reasons ought to be given for such decision so that an impression is not created that the court has already made up its mind before hearing the defence case. 4. Ruling accordingly. J. M. NANG’EA, JUDGE. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2024/16139/eng@2024-12-19 1

page 1 of 2