NAKURU, Kenya – Six current and former Nakuru County officials will no longer face a set of corruption charges linked to a Sh120.4 million procurement investigation after the court approved the prosecution’s request to withdraw the counts, citing insufficient evidence connecting the transactions to specific tenders.
The decision, delivered by Chief Magistrate Tito Gesora on Monday, October 19, 2026, followed an application by the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) to withdraw counts 12 to 17 against the officials.
The move was opposed by the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC), which questioned the lack of formal notification and asked for an opportunity to respond before the application was determined. The Standard reported that the court nevertheless allowed the withdrawal under Section 87(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
The ruling narrows the proceedings against the six officials but does not end the wider case, which remains scheduled for hearing on March 8, 2027.
Why The Prosecution Changed Its Position
The ODPP told the court that a review of the evidence had failed to establish a sufficient link between the transactions under investigation and any tender or procurement process.
The prosecution therefore sought to withdraw the specified counts under Section 87(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code. Defence lawyers supported the application.
The decision highlights a distinction in corruption cases: evidence that money was paid to a company does not, by itself, establish that a particular public officer received a kickback or improperly influenced a procurement process. Investigators and prosecutors must establish the necessary connection between the alleged conduct and the offence charged.
The court accepted the prosecution’s application, exercising its role in determining whether the withdrawal could proceed.
The withdrawal should not be confused with a finding that every allegation in the broader investigation was false. It concerns the specified counts against the six officials, based on the prosecution’s assessment of the evidence presented.
EACC Wanted A Formal Opportunity To Respond
The EACC raised concerns that it had not been formally notified of the prosecution’s intention to withdraw the charges.
The commission asked the court to direct the ODPP to file a written application and serve it on the investigating agency so that it could obtain instructions and respond. It cited the public interest in the case and its role in investigating the alleged procurement irregularities.
The disagreement brings into focus the relationship between the DPP, who exercises prosecutorial authority, and the EACC, which investigates corruption and economic crimes.
Under Article 157 of the Constitution, the Director of Public Prosecutions has authority to institute and undertake criminal proceedings, subject to constitutional safeguards. Section 87(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code provides a mechanism for withdrawing a prosecution before the court.
The EACC’s objection, however, raises a broader accountability question: how should investigating agencies be involved when a prosecution is discontinued in a matter involving substantial public funds?
The court allowed the application despite the commission’s concerns.
The Companies At The Centre Of The Investigation
The wider case arose from investigations into alleged conflict of interest involving Nakuru County economist Lorna Karamuta Mubichi and companies associated with her husband, Kenneth Muriithi Ndubi.
The three firms named in the investigation are Denken Building & Construction Limited, Murinchamba Investments Limited and Windcom Solutions Limited.
According to the EACC’s account when the suspects were arrested in July 2026, the companies received payments from Nakuru County amounting to Sh120,042,417 for contracts awarded between the 2020/2021 and 2024/2025 financial years. The commission said the contracts included 29 awards. Y News reported the initial arrests and allegations.
The six officials whose specified charges have now been withdrawn are:
- Daniel Ndung’u Wainaina
- Kennedy Mungai Barasa
- Timothy Kiogora Murithi
- Josphat Kimemia
- Peter Gitau Thabanja
- Dr Solomon Sirma
They had faced allegations of engaging in corrupt practices by receiving kickbacks intended to influence procurement decisions. Those allegations must be distinguished from the prosecution’s subsequent position that the evidence did not sufficiently connect the transactions in question to a tender or procurement process.
The Wider Case Is Still Pending
The court’s decision does not close the proceedings against the other accused persons in the wider case.
The remaining matter is scheduled for hearing on March 8, 2027. The outstanding proceedings will determine how the remaining allegations are handled through the court process.
For Nakuru residents, the case remains significant because it concerns payments of more than Sh120 million from county resources and allegations involving public procurement.
The immediate legal outcome is clear: the specified charges against the six officials have been withdrawn. The wider case, however, remains before the court, leaving further proceedings to determine the outstanding allegations.
