NAIROBI, Kenya Mar 25 – The Milimani Magistrates Court has dismissed an application by the Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI) seeking to obtain search warrants against former Cabinet Secretary Raphael Tuju, citing insufficient evidence and failure to establish any offence.
In its ruling, the court found that the application, brought under Section 118 of the Criminal Procedure Code, did not meet the legal threshold required to justify a search.
The magistrate noted that the request was anchored on a suspected false report recorded in the Occurrence Book. However, the report had been made by a third party—not Tuju—raising questions about why investigators were targeting his residence.
The court held that there was no clear connection established between Tuju and the alleged offence.
Although investigators suggested that Tuju may have filed a separate report at a police station, the application failed to provide any details or evidence of such a report.
This omission left the court without sufficient material to determine whether any wrongdoing had occurred.
The court emphasized that search warrants can only be issued where there is credible and specific evidence linking a suspect to a crime.
In this case, the magistrate found that the prosecution had not demonstrated any offence, including the alleged crime of giving false information to a public officer under Section 129(a) of the Penal Code.
Granting the orders, the court added, would have amounted to an unjustified invasion of Tuju’s privacy.
Through his lawyer Duncan Okatch, Tuju opposed the application, describing it as an abuse of the court process.
The defence argued that the move was disingenuous, pointing out that there is a related criminal matter pending before the Kibera Law Courts.
Okatch further termed the application malicious, questioning its basis and the circumstances under which the orders were being sought.
“In the circumstances, it is only in the interest of justice that the application be struck out,” the court ruled.
The decision marks a setback for investigators and underscores the judiciary’s insistence on strict adherence to legal standards before granting intrusive orders such as search warrants.