High Court 19635 of 2025

Judgment in R. Vs Peter Kuria HCR No 34 of 2019 4. This is a case where the death is in fact not proven, no post-mortem examination report was ever produced and the court file does contain a post mortem report unrelated to this case. 5. No Exhibits were ever produced in aid. 6. All in All, the entire prosecutions case was anchored on alleged foot prints leading to the accused compound and house. 7. PW1 Margaret Njeri Njoki a sister to the deceased testified how she discovered the deceased unresponsive at 4.pm She never witnessed the attack or implicated the accused however she indicates that her grandmother informed her of what transpired at the accused compound. 8. PW2 Mary Njeri Njoroge, recalled that on 31st July, 2019, at about 7:00 pm. As Darkness was falling she found a girl lying behind the house. She was at Kobonoyo selling Sukuma Wiki when she was called by her daughter Grace Njeri Njoroge who told her that her child Mary Njoki was lying there behind the house. She went where the child was lying behind the house and touched the child. She was dead. 9. There were other people outside there. She could not count. When she found the child where she was there were people; 2 people. Grace and another person whom she could not recall. She saw the space where the person had entered through. The fence is a live fence. The person had forced a space in the fence to gain entry. Page 2 of 6

page 2 of 6

Judgment in R. Vs Peter Kuria HCR No 34 of 2019 10. There is no path there. The path is by the front of the house. When she saw the space, she knew that the person had passed there because she saw footprints going and coming. The prints were muddy of one person. 11. The police officer came and told them to wait for police officers from Subukia. When the other officers came, they followed the foot prints which entered the house of the kijana. She knew the accused. In that home they found Peter Kuria. He had locked the door. That he was asked whether he was the one who had killed the child he said yes. He was asked how, he said by strangling her with a rope. His clothes were muddy. 12. That there was no one else in the house of Peter Kuria. The police carried his clothes. She saw a rope there. The police carried the rope. Shown rope. I saw this rope in Kuria’s house. The rope was muddy. PMFI1. This is a trouser. It’s muddy, it was in his house. PMFI2 brown pair of trousers. This a jacket he was wearing this jacket and the trouser, PMFI3. The police carried the clothes and Peter Kuria to Subukia Police Station. They also took the body of the girl and went with it. 13. PW4 Grace Njoki Njoroge, mother of the deceased testified how she discovered the body of the deceased, how there were foot prints leading to the accused compound, the accused who is her brother. Page 3 of 6

page 3 of 6

Judgment in R. Vs Peter Kuria HCR No 34 of 2019 How they called the police, the trail was photographed and the accused apprehended 14. PW5 Daniel Njoroge Njuguna, the accused father, generally testified how he witnessed the accused being arrested. He was on medication and was awoken by the incident. 15. PW6 Anne Gathoni Mwangi, testified how she was called on the material day after the fact, that she thought the girl had fainted only to arrive and find the girl dead. 16. PW7 John Njoroge an uncle to the deceased recalled how on the 5th August 2019 he witnessed the post-mortem on the body of the deceased as well as identified it in Nyahururu County Mortuary. Defence Case 17. DW1, Peter Kuria, gave his evidence under oath that on the material day he was up and about his daily chores until at 10am when his father PW5 asked him to go graze the goats of which he did until 1.p.m when he found PW5 unwell and he went to his room to listen to music until he was called following the discovery of the body. He denied any involvement and maintained that in fact the foot prints never led to his house but rather the back of the boma. Analysis and Determination 18. Taking into account the evidence and testimonies before Court, the single issue in question is whether the Prosecution proved beyond a Page 4 of 6

page 4 of 6

Judgment in R. Vs Peter Kuria HCR No 34 of 2019 reasonable doubt all the elements of murder against the Accused person herein. 19. The Sections 203 and 204 of the Penal Code under which the Accused is charged with provide for the offense of murder and the punishment for it as follows: “203.Any person who, of Malice aforethought, causes the death of another person by an unlawful act or omission is guilty of murder. 204.Any person who is convicted of murder shall be sentenced to death." 20. The key vital elements to prove murder beyond reasonable doubt are:a) The fact of the death; b) Cause of death; that is, it was caused as a result of an unlawful act or omission; c) Proof that the accused person act or omission was the causation, and d) whether, if the accused caused the death, he did it with malice aforethought. 21. The first element of death was not proved no post mortem produced. 22. On the second element, that the death was caused as a result of an unlawful act or omission, in the absence of proof of death it remains unknown and unproven. Page 5 of 6

page 5 of 6

Judgment in R. Vs Peter Kuria HCR No 34 of 2019 23. On the third element of whether it was the Accused who caused the Deceased's unlawful death there was no evidence directly linking the accused to the offence. This element was not adequately proved. 24. From my analysis of the Prosecution and defence evidence tendered, I find no evidence adduced by the Prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused herein is the person who in fact caused the death of the deceased. 25. Therefore, the Prosecution having failed to prove the fact that the accused caused the death of the deceased, it would be an act in futility and an academic exercise to consider the issue of presence or otherwise of malice aforethought. 26. In the end, I find that the prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused herein beyond any reasonable doubt. Consequently, I find the accused Peter Kuria not guilty of the charge of murder contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code. He is hereby ordered acquitted of the said charge. He is to be set at liberty forthwith unless otherwise lawfully held. It is so ordered. It is so ordered. Dated, Signed and Delivered at Nakuru On this 4th day of August 2025 ____________________________ Mohochi S.M. Judge Page 6 of 6

page 6 of 6