Court strikes out plea for search warrants against Tuju

In a ruling delivered under case number MCCRMISC/E1359/2026, the court found that investigators had failed to establish a basis for pursuing a search of Tuju’s residence in connection with an alleged false report.

The application, brought under Section 118 of the Criminal Procedure Code, sought court authorisation to search and seize materials believed to be relevant to an ongoing investigation. 

The law empowers courts to issue search warrants where there is reasonable suspicion that evidence linked to an offence may be found in a specified location.

However, the magistrate noted that the investigation was anchored on a suspected false report recorded under Occurrence Book (OB) number 17/22/03/2026, which had been lodged by an individual other than Tuju.

While the court was informed of a separate alleged false report said to have been made by Tuju, the application did not provide sufficient details to substantiate the claim.

“As it stands, on a balance of probabilities, the application does not disclose an offence to be investigated on the part of the respondent,” the court ruled.

The magistrate further observed that the offence of giving false information to a person employed in public service, contrary to Section 129(a) of the Penal Code, had not been adequately demonstrated against Tuju.

In the circumstances, the court held that allowing the application would not serve the interests of justice.

The application was consequently struck out.

While opposing the application, Tuju, through lawyer Duncan Okatch, told the court that the application by the DCI is an abuse of the court process.

He  termed the application as "disingenuous "as there is another pending criminal matter in the Kibera law courts 

He also argued that it was malicious for the DCI to be granted orders, yet no one is in the house.