AC 4 OF 2014 - Republic vs Lawrence Kuria Warachi
Summary: The accused was arraigned in court for allegedly using his office to improperly confer a benefit to Wellington Weru Kahuthia and Fredrick Muthaura Magiri by irregularly issuing them with title deeds for parcels of land in Laikipia which were public utilities. The prosecution spresented witnessed and the Green Card showing that that the said parcels were Government lands before they were transferred to the two beneficiaries. The accused in his defence presented a letter from the Chief Land Registrar giving directions to the District Land Registrar to issue the title deeds. He also contended that the prosecution did not call key witnesses to testify on the issuance of the titles, key among them being the directors of Mwichuiri farmers, who had occupancy of the land and who signed the clearence certificates. There were also amendments on the area list and member register, which he did not certify or know of. He concluded that he did not do anything unprocedural. The case however had numerous inconsistencies and disrepancies. For one, key documents that were relied on by the prosecution had gaps, alterarions and cancelletions. The register of members and area lists relied upon by the prosecution had numerous alterations, gaps, cancellations and white outs. None of the witnesses could tell who or when the alterations were made and for what purpose. Further, the Land Registrar testified that she was never consulted, nor did she authorize or certify any document for use by the IO in this case. The court stated that the investigator took short cuts in investigating this case, which proved fatal to the case, and that the Prosecutor had failed to show the court that the accused person was aware that the parcel of land was reserved for public use. No one from the survey office gave evidence as to the chain of custody of key documents. Key documents were denied by Prosecution witnesses. Based on this, the accused was acquitted under Criminal Procedure Code S 215.
First offence date: 02/Dec/2009
Start date: 05/Jun/2014
Ruling date: 01/Jan/1970
Defendant plea:
Amount involved: KES 0.00
Type of case: Abuse of Office
Resolution comments:
Charge
Plea
Fine amount
Judgement
Count 1 - Abuse of office contrary to Section 46 as read with Section 48(1) of the Anti Corruption and Economic Crimes Act
Not guilty
0.00
Acquittal
Count 2 - Abuse of office contrary to Section 46 as read with Section 48(1) of the Anti Corruption and Economic Crimes Act
Not guilty
0.00
Acquittal