A Meru High Court ordered a re-trial of an enforcement officer in the county who was charged with unlawfully damaging a pair of spectacles worth Sh20,000 and subsequently acquitted.
In the judgment delivered on April 4, 2024, High Court judge Justice Edward Muriithi found that the trial court fell into error when it acquitted James Miriti Kobia yet the prosecution had established a prima facie case against him to warrant him being placed on his defence.
Prima facie describes a fact or presumption that is sufficient to be regarded as true unless otherwise regarded as true unless otherwise disproved or rebutted.
“Without deciding so as not to prejudice the trial court in view of the order for retrial hereinafter made, finds that there is evidence upon which a trial court may find that the respondent is guilty of the charge herein as to warrant his being placed on his defence,” ruled Muriithi.
The court also ruled that his acquittal was against the weight of the evidence led.
The prosecution moved to the High Court on grounds that the trial court had erred in law and in fact in finding that the prosecution had not adduced sufficient evidence in support of the charge.
It also accused the trial court of failing to evaluate the facts properly and make a finding that all the essential elements of malicious damage were proved to the required standard.
According to the complainant, he arrived at Maxxis Club on November 11, 2021 at midnight for a late dinner in his Toyota Wagon.
At parking two people came to him. One was the accused person Miriti who was also his friend and the other had a mask and was dread headed.
They accused him of causing obstruction.
He alleged the person with a mask and dreads confronted him and he had to come out of the car and in the process Miriti broke his spectacles.
“He pulled them from my eyes as I was seated on the steering. The glasses are worth Sh20,000,” Kirema testified.
“The dread headed guy went to the other side and tried to pull the other person out of the car and in the process he broke the front windscreen on the left side.”
On cross examination Kirema said he knew the accused person when he sold newspapers in Maua however the accused later joined the county government of Meru as an enforcement officer.
“My spectacles were broken. The lenses are okay. The frames were damaged,” h testified
In acquitting the accused the trial court rendered that “the prosecution had shown the spectacles belonged to the complainant and the spectacles have shown to have been damaged on the frame.”
However, the court found that there was nothing to show that the accused caused the damage willfully.
“There was no evidence led to show that the damage was willful and unlawful hence the charge against the accused person cannot be sustained.”
“I do then find that the prosecution has not established a prima facie case and I proceed to acquit the accused under Section 210 of the Criminal Procedure Code for the offence of malicious damage to property contrary to section 3399(1). The accused shall be set at liberty unless otherwise lawfully held,” ruled the trial court.
Kobia will be tried in Maua Law courts that will be constituted differently.
Email your news TIPS to Editor@Kahawatungu.com — this is our only official communication channel
