JUDGMENT
1. The Accused, Vincent Kipkirui, also known as Vincent Kigen, faces a charge of
murder, contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code. It
is alleged that on the 30
th October 2023 at Kaiboi – Nandi North within Nandi
County he murdered Dennis Kipchirchir [deceased].
2. The case for the prosecution was founded on the facts that both the Accused and
the deceased were college mates and friends at the Kaiboi National Polytechnic
and on the material date at about 9:00pm they were together in the room or
house of the deceased situated within the Kaiboi shopping Centre while in the
company of fellow students including Marion Chepkemboi [PW1] and Brian
Langat [PW4].
3. The group of four apparently deliberated over the relationship between the
deceased and Marion [PW1] who was said to be a girlfriend of the Accused, but
in a similar relationship with the deceased. In the process, a physical
confrontation occurred between the accused and the deceased leading to the
deceased sustaining a fatal injury resulting from a stab wound occasioned to him
with a sharp object said to be a knife by the Accused.
4. Thereafter, the Accused asked Brian [PW4] to go away even as he [accused] left
the room. He returned shortly thereafter and forced Marion [PW1] to
accompany him to his house where she stayed upto the following morning when
she left to seek treatment at a hospital as she was also attacked and injured by
the Accused.
In the meantime, Brian [PW4] alerted fellow students on what had transpired in
the house of the deceased. Victor Kiptoo [PW3] and Ronald Kiptoo Bett
[PW6] were among those students. They accompanied Brian [PW4] back to
the house of the deceased and found it in darkness. They alerted the deceased
neighbours who included Abiud Kiptoo [PW2] and Robinson Kamau Kariuki
[PW5].
5. The two [PW2 and PW5] while in the company of other students proceeded to
the house of the deceased. They found the door wide open and the light put
off. They ventured into the house and found the deceased lying on a bed with
his legs stretched to the floor/ground. They noted blood stains on the bed and
notified the police as well as their dean of students. The dean arrived at the
scene and confirmed that the deceased was already dead.
6. A post mortem was later conducted on the body of the deceased at the Kapsabet
Referral Hospital by Dr. Evans Kibiwott [PW7], who compiled and signed the
post mortem report [P. Exhibit 1] showing that the cause of death was acute
blood loss due to penetrating injury to the chest cavity injuring the aorta.
7. The police investigated the matter after receiving the necessary report on the
midnight of the material date. They proceeded to the scene and found a crowd of
onlookers at the deceased’s rental room. They entered the room and found the
deceased lying across a bed in a pool of blood. She was already dead. A
penetrating stab wound on the left side of the chest cavity was visible.
The police then removed the body of the deceased to the mortuary at Kapsabet.
8. The police investigations determined that the Accused and the deceased
quarreled over a girlfriend and in the process the deceased was stabbed on his
chest with a sharp object by the Accused. A knife was the suspected weapon
used in the assault which proved fatal.
The scene of the offence was sketched and a sketch plan [P. Exhibit 2] drawn by
the investigations officer, PC Peter Kamau [PW8] of the Directorate of Criminal
Investigations [DCI] Nandi-North.
9. The Accused was charged with the present offence after completion of police
investigations. His defence was essentially a denial and a contention that he did
not commit the offence. He indicated that he arrived at the house of the
deceased and questioned him on his relationship with their female colleague
[PW1] who was said to be a girlfriend to both the Accused and the deceased.
10. Prior to receiving a respond from the deceased, the lights inside the house
went off and a commotion erupted thereby leading to the Accused being hit on his
right ear and knees by an unknown person. The Accused struggled to get out of
the house even though he could not see properly due to the ear injury. He shortly
thereafter returned into the house to fetch the female colleague [PW1] as she
had called for him and pleading not to be left at the scene. The two then went to
the Accused’s house.
11. The Accused contended further that he had no knife and did not use any
knife. He said that since he had come from a mathematics discussion with the
deceased Brian [PW4] and others when they proceeded to the house of the
deceased the only thing which was in his possession was a calculator.
He maintained that he did not stab and kill the deceased and it was only on the
following day that he learnt from Brian [PW4] that things were not good. He was
at his home when he was arrested by the police.
12. The offence of murder is committed when a person of malice aforethought
causes the death of another by means of unlawful act.
What therefore emerged as the main issue for determination in this matter was
whether the death of the deceased was as a result of an unlawful act of assault
committed against him and if so, whether the offending assailant was the
Accused.
13. The evidence by prosecution witnesses who were at the scene at the
material time i.e. Marion [PW1] and Brian [PW2] and those who arrived at the
scene after the fact i.e. Kiptoo Abiud [PW2], Kiptoo Victor [PW3], Kariuki
Robinson [PW5] and Bett Ronald [PW6] confirmed that the deceased met is
death after he was fatally assaulted with a sharp object which was apparently not
recovered.
These witness established that the deceased was actually stabbed with a sharp
object.
14. Marion [PW1] and Brian [PW4] were present when the incident occurred.
They indicated that the deceased was stabbed on the chest with the sharp object
while engaged in a fight or physical confrontation with the Accused occasioned by
a suspected love triangle involving the deceased, the Accused and Marion
[PW1]. As it were, Marion [PW1] was the “agent provocateur” of the physical
confrontation with tragic consequences.
15. Indeed, there was no dispute from the defence that the deceased was
fatally assaulted in the cause of the unlawful confrontation or fight between
himself and the Accused.
However, the Accused vehemently denied being the person responsible for fatally
stabbing the deceased. He thus implied that the deceased was stabbed by
somebody else, that he [Accused] was without good cause implicated with the
offence by Marion [PW1] and Brian [PW2].
16. Despite the denial and the aspersion cast by the Accused upon Marion
[PW1 and Brian [PW2], it was apparent that the deceased was assaulted by the
Accused with whom the deceased engaged in the violent confrontation. The
Accused could not therefore be heard to deny being the person responsible for
assaulting the deceased and causing him fatal injury. However, the evidence
suggested quite clearly that the Accused did not have the actual intention to
cause the death of the deceased. His mistake which brought him into conflict
with the law was to use unreasonable and excessive force against the deceased.
17. Both the Accused and the deceased with their raw youthful energy acted
recklessly and foolishly when they engaged in a physical confrontation or fight
over a damsel in the person of Marion [PW1] whom they each craved for her
love.
In essence, rather than the offence of murder, the prosecution established and
proved beyond doubt the offence of manslaughter against the Accused.
18. Accordingly, this court must and hereby finds the Accused guilty of
manslaughter, Contrary to Section 202[1] of the Penal Code and convicts him.
It was sad that he took away the life of his friend and college mate out of sheer
jealousy and sense of defeat by the deceased. He allowed his emotions get a
hold of him and wrestle good judgment away from him.
Dated and Delivered this 18
th day of February 2026
HON. J. R. KARANJAH,
JUDGE
1. The Accused, Vincent Kipkirui, also known as Vincent Kigen, faces a charge of
murder, contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code. It
is alleged that on the 30
th October 2023 at Kaiboi – Nandi North within Nandi
County he murdered Dennis Kipchirchir [deceased].
2. The case for the prosecution was founded on the facts that both the Accused and
the deceased were college mates and friends at the Kaiboi National Polytechnic
and on the material date at about 9:00pm they were together in the room or
house of the deceased situated within the Kaiboi shopping Centre while in the
company of fellow students including Marion Chepkemboi [PW1] and Brian
Langat [PW4].
3. The group of four apparently deliberated over the relationship between the
deceased and Marion [PW1] who was said to be a girlfriend of the Accused, but
in a similar relationship with the deceased. In the process, a physical
confrontation occurred between the accused and the deceased leading to the
deceased sustaining a fatal injury resulting from a stab wound occasioned to him
with a sharp object said to be a knife by the Accused.
4. Thereafter, the Accused asked Brian [PW4] to go away even as he [accused] left
the room. He returned shortly thereafter and forced Marion [PW1] to
accompany him to his house where she stayed upto the following morning when
she left to seek treatment at a hospital as she was also attacked and injured by
the Accused.
In the meantime, Brian [PW4] alerted fellow students on what had transpired in
the house of the deceased. Victor Kiptoo [PW3] and Ronald Kiptoo Bett
[PW6] were among those students. They accompanied Brian [PW4] back to
the house of the deceased and found it in darkness. They alerted the deceased
neighbours who included Abiud Kiptoo [PW2] and Robinson Kamau Kariuki
[PW5].
5. The two [PW2 and PW5] while in the company of other students proceeded to
the house of the deceased. They found the door wide open and the light put
off. They ventured into the house and found the deceased lying on a bed with
his legs stretched to the floor/ground. They noted blood stains on the bed and
notified the police as well as their dean of students. The dean arrived at the
scene and confirmed that the deceased was already dead.
6. A post mortem was later conducted on the body of the deceased at the Kapsabet
Referral Hospital by Dr. Evans Kibiwott [PW7], who compiled and signed the
post mortem report [P. Exhibit 1] showing that the cause of death was acute
blood loss due to penetrating injury to the chest cavity injuring the aorta.
7. The police investigated the matter after receiving the necessary report on the
midnight of the material date. They proceeded to the scene and found a crowd of
onlookers at the deceased’s rental room. They entered the room and found the
deceased lying across a bed in a pool of blood. She was already dead. A
penetrating stab wound on the left side of the chest cavity was visible.
The police then removed the body of the deceased to the mortuary at Kapsabet.
8. The police investigations determined that the Accused and the deceased
quarreled over a girlfriend and in the process the deceased was stabbed on his
chest with a sharp object by the Accused. A knife was the suspected weapon
used in the assault which proved fatal.
The scene of the offence was sketched and a sketch plan [P. Exhibit 2] drawn by
the investigations officer, PC Peter Kamau [PW8] of the Directorate of Criminal
Investigations [DCI] Nandi-North.
9. The Accused was charged with the present offence after completion of police
investigations. His defence was essentially a denial and a contention that he did
not commit the offence. He indicated that he arrived at the house of the
deceased and questioned him on his relationship with their female colleague
[PW1] who was said to be a girlfriend to both the Accused and the deceased.
10. Prior to receiving a respond from the deceased, the lights inside the house
went off and a commotion erupted thereby leading to the Accused being hit on his
right ear and knees by an unknown person. The Accused struggled to get out of
the house even though he could not see properly due to the ear injury. He shortly
thereafter returned into the house to fetch the female colleague [PW1] as she
had called for him and pleading not to be left at the scene. The two then went to
the Accused’s house.
11. The Accused contended further that he had no knife and did not use any
knife. He said that since he had come from a mathematics discussion with the
deceased Brian [PW4] and others when they proceeded to the house of the
deceased the only thing which was in his possession was a calculator.
He maintained that he did not stab and kill the deceased and it was only on the
following day that he learnt from Brian [PW4] that things were not good. He was
at his home when he was arrested by the police.
12. The offence of murder is committed when a person of malice aforethought
causes the death of another by means of unlawful act.
What therefore emerged as the main issue for determination in this matter was
whether the death of the deceased was as a result of an unlawful act of assault
committed against him and if so, whether the offending assailant was the
Accused.
13. The evidence by prosecution witnesses who were at the scene at the
material time i.e. Marion [PW1] and Brian [PW2] and those who arrived at the
scene after the fact i.e. Kiptoo Abiud [PW2], Kiptoo Victor [PW3], Kariuki
Robinson [PW5] and Bett Ronald [PW6] confirmed that the deceased met is
death after he was fatally assaulted with a sharp object which was apparently not
recovered.
These witness established that the deceased was actually stabbed with a sharp
object.
14. Marion [PW1] and Brian [PW4] were present when the incident occurred.
They indicated that the deceased was stabbed on the chest with the sharp object
while engaged in a fight or physical confrontation with the Accused occasioned by
a suspected love triangle involving the deceased, the Accused and Marion
[PW1]. As it were, Marion [PW1] was the “agent provocateur” of the physical
confrontation with tragic consequences.
15. Indeed, there was no dispute from the defence that the deceased was
fatally assaulted in the cause of the unlawful confrontation or fight between
himself and the Accused.
However, the Accused vehemently denied being the person responsible for fatally
stabbing the deceased. He thus implied that the deceased was stabbed by
somebody else, that he [Accused] was without good cause implicated with the
offence by Marion [PW1] and Brian [PW2].
16. Despite the denial and the aspersion cast by the Accused upon Marion
[PW1 and Brian [PW2], it was apparent that the deceased was assaulted by the
Accused with whom the deceased engaged in the violent confrontation. The
Accused could not therefore be heard to deny being the person responsible for
assaulting the deceased and causing him fatal injury. However, the evidence
suggested quite clearly that the Accused did not have the actual intention to
cause the death of the deceased. His mistake which brought him into conflict
with the law was to use unreasonable and excessive force against the deceased.
17. Both the Accused and the deceased with their raw youthful energy acted
recklessly and foolishly when they engaged in a physical confrontation or fight
over a damsel in the person of Marion [PW1] whom they each craved for her
love.
In essence, rather than the offence of murder, the prosecution established and
proved beyond doubt the offence of manslaughter against the Accused.
18. Accordingly, this court must and hereby finds the Accused guilty of
manslaughter, Contrary to Section 202[1] of the Penal Code and convicts him.
It was sad that he took away the life of his friend and college mate out of sheer
jealousy and sense of defeat by the deceased. He allowed his emotions get a
hold of him and wrestle good judgment away from him.
Dated and Delivered this 18
th day of February 2026
HON. J. R. KARANJAH,
JUDGE