Businesswoman in Sh2.2bn tax evasion case released on Sh25 million cash bail

Businesswoman Mary Wambui who is accused of evading tax totalling Sh2.2 billion has been released on a Sh25 million cash bail.

Her co-accused, Purity Njoki Mungai was also released with the same amount.

On Thursday, the two presented themselves before Anti-Corruption Magistrate Felix Kombo after escaping a police dragnet at Weston Hotel, Nairobi on Wednesday night.

An arrest warrant had been issued against the two for failing to honour summons by the Kenya Revenue Authority.

The two are directors of Purma holdings limited which has been listed as the first accused. 

Magistrate Kombo granted the accused persons Sh50 million bond with a surety of Sh25 million each or a cash bail of Sh25 million each.

The Judge directed that they deposit all their travelling documents including a temporary permit for the Republic of Zambia belonging to Wambui.

"They will not travel out of Kenya. This order shall be served on the immigration department," Kombo said.

The Judge said once they manage to pay bail, they will present themselves to DCI KRA on December 14 for internal processing.

They were also warned not to interfere with the witnesses.

The case will be mentioned on December 16, 2021.

The two were represented by lawyers Nelson Havi and Sylvanus Osoro. 

Havi said the purpose of the mention was to present Wambui and Purity in court and explain why they had not done so as directed earlier. 

"Reason, why they could not have presented themselves earlier, is because Mary was unwell and she is still unwell but upon being instructed yesterday I advised both of them we appear in court today," he said.

"Second reason we are here is to have the accused persons take plea on their own capacity and for Purma holding. We are ready to take plea."

The accused persons are facing eight counts related to failure to pay taxes amounting to Sh2.5 billion that should have been paid through their company, Purma.

The state had opposed granting of bail/bond to the accused persons.

The court heard that on December 3, summons were issued to the accused persons by the I.O for purposes of informing them of the intention of arranging them in court but they failed to honour the summons.

Edited by D Tarus