Case Metadata |
|
Case Number: | Criminal Case 10 of 2012 |
---|---|
Parties: | Republic v Peter Nginya Maina & Siriako Maina Nginya |
Date Delivered: | 20 Nov 2018 |
Case Class: | Criminal |
Court: | High Court at Murang'a |
Case Action: | Ruling |
Judge(s): | Kanyi Kimondo |
Citation: | Republic v Peter Nginya Maina & another [2018] eKLR |
Advocates: | Mr. Mwaniki for the accused. Ms. Gichuru for the Republic. |
Court Division: | Criminal |
Advocates: | Mr. Mwaniki for the accused. Ms. Gichuru for the Republic. |
History Advocates: | Both Parties Represented |
Case Outcome: | Accused persons put on their defence |
Disclaimer: | The information contained in the above segment is not part of the judicial opinion delivered by the Court. The metadata has been prepared by Kenya Law as a guide in understanding the subject of the judicial opinion. Kenya Law makes no warranties as to the comprehensiveness or accuracy of the information |
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT MURANG’A
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 10 OF 2012
REPUBLIC...................................................................................PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
PETER NGINYA MAINA.............................................................1ST ACCUSED
SIRIAKO MAINA NGINYA.........................................................2ND ACCUSED
RULING
1. The accused are charged with murder contrary to section 203 as read with section 204 of the Penal Code.
2. The particulars are that on the night of 24th and 25th February 2011 at Kiawambeu Village, Muchungucha Sub-location, Mbiri Location within Murang’a County, they jointly murdered John Gikungu Waweru.
3. They pleaded not guilty. The prosecution called three witnesses.
4. I have considered the direct and circumstantial evidence surrounding the homicide.
5. I have paid heed to the evidence of PW2. She testified that on 24th February 2011 at Ndikwe Bar, she saw the two accused persons beat a man unconscious. She also stated that the two dragged the bleeding man outside the bar. When she saw the body of the deceased at a bridge the following day, she claimed it was that of the person assaulted by the accused.
6. There is also the testimony of PW3 that the deceased may have had an illicit affair with the wife of the 1st accused.
7. I am well guided by Bhatt v Republic [1957] E.A. 332, R v Kipkering arap Koske & another 16 EACA 135 (1949).
8. On the summation of the evidence of the all the three witnesses, I am persuaded that the Republic has established a prima facie case against both accused.
9. Accordingly, under the provisions of section 306 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, I put both accused on their defence.
It is so ordered.
DATED, SIGNED and DELIVERED at MURANG’A this 20th day of December 2018.
KANYI KIMONDO
JUDGE
Ruling read in open court in the presence of-
Accused.
Mr. Kinuthia for Mr. Mwaniki for the accused.
Ms. Gichuru for the Republic.
Ms. Dorcas and Ms. Elizabeth, Court Clerks.