REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MACHAKOS CRIMINAL CASE NO.E024 OF 2021 REPUBLIC ……………….………...…………………. PROSECUTION VERSUS PATRICK MUEMA MUINDE ……………………..………..ACCUSED RULING 1. The accused person is charged with murder contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code. According to the information presented to this court by the Director of Public Prosecution, the particulars of the charge are that on the night of 8 th March 2018 and 9th March 2018, the accused murdered James Musyoka Munyao. The offence is alleged to have been committed at Maweli village, Maweli Sub-location, Makutano Location, Mwala Sub-County in Machakos County. 2. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge following which the prosecution called seven (7) witnesses to prove its case. Some of the evidence was recorded by my predecessor and the rest by myself. 3. At the close of the prosecution’s case, learned Counsel for the prosecution and for the accused, elected to make their arguments, as required by Section 306(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code, by way of written HCCR CASE NO. E024 OF 2021 1
page 1 of 4
submissions. This therefore is a ruling to determine whether there is evidence that the accused committed the offence, as would warrant him to be put on his defence as required by Section 306(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. In other words, this court is required to determine whether or not a prima facie case has been established against the accused person to warrant him to be put on his defence. 4. As correctly submitted by Mr. Nthiwa, Learned Counsel for the accused, and was held in the case of Bhatt v Republic [1957] EA 332, a prima facie case is one where a reasonable tribunal properly directing its mind, would convict even were the accused elect to remain silent when put on his defence. 5. The ingredients of the offence of murder which the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt are: a) Death of the deceased; b) That the death was by an unlawful act of the accused; and c) That the unlawful act was of malice aforethought. 6. Having carefully considered the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, the able submissions of learned Counsel for the parties, the cases cited and the law, I am satisfied that the death of the deceased occurred and that it was by an unlawful act is also not in doubt. What is in dispute is that the accused was the perpetrator of the unlawful act. HCCR CASE NO. E024 OF 2021 2
page 2 of 4
7. There was no eye witness to this crime and hence there is no direct evidence against the accused person. I am however, satisfied that there is circumstantial evidence tending to the guilt of the accused. That evidence arises from the Government Analyst’s report which linked the blood of the deceased to an item of clothing recovered from the house of the accused person by the officer who investigated the case. The accused shall therefore be required to defend and/or enter his defence as required under Section 306 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. It is so ordered. Ruling signed, dated and delivered virtually via Microsoft teams on this 25th day of June, 2026. E. N. MAINA JUDGE In the presence of: Mr. Masila for the State Mr.Wekesa for the accused holding brief for Mr. Nthiwa HCCR CASE NO. E024 OF 2021 3
page 3 of 4
The accused Catherine - Court Assistant/Interpreter HCCR CASE NO. E024 OF 2021 4
page 4 of 4