For Francis Mwanzia Mutunga, the last three years have been a nightmare of courtrooms, prison cells and a relentless fight to prove his innocence.
In 2022, he was convicted of attempting to defile a 15-year-old girl—a charge he always denied.
On May 2, 2025, Court of Appeal in Nairobi finally set him free, ruling that the evidence against him was too weak to justify his conviction.
A life turned upside down
Mutunga’s ordeal began on an ordinary December afternoon in 2020, when he was accused of attacking a teenager in Makueni County.
The prosecution claimed he had pretended to be a police officer, confronted the girl about not wearing a face mask, and then attempted to assault her.
The court heard that the girl, code-named PMK, attempted to get away from him but he held her by her clothes, she struggled to let go and screamed.
He did not relent, the struggle lasted for about half an hour.
“Exhausted and ‘weak’ after the lengthy scuffle, she fell to the ground. He lifted her skirt and removed her inner wear but luckily, some people who were burning charcoal nearby came to her rescue,” the prosecution said.
The rescuers then arrested Mutunga, and both the victim and the assailant were taken to a police station.
Central to PMK’s testimony was that she sustained injuries during the struggle, on the back of her leg - scratches caused by stones - and injuries on her neck due to strangulation.
The court heard that so pivotal was the supposed physical assault that the prosecution preferred a second count against the appellant of assault causing actual bodily harm.
The findings of a clinical officer however stood in direct contrast to PMK’s claim of having suffered injuries to her leg and neck.
“On examination, there were no injuries noted on the body. On the genitalia the hymen was intact,” he said.
This contradiction would later become central to the appellate court's ruling.
In his defence, Mutunga denied all charges without implicating himself.
Discrepancies and doubt
In their decision, Appellate Judges Jamila Mohammed, Francis Tuiyott, and Pauline Nyamweya noted PMK’s claims.
These, being that she had suffered scratches on her leg from stones and injuries on her neck due to strangulation during the prolonged struggle.
They however noted that the medical evidence provided by the clinical officer clearly stated there were no visible injuries on PMK’s body.
“The medical evidence was emphatic that no injuries were suffered by the complainant at all. Debunking the evidence of the victim,” the judges observed.
This discrepancy between PMK’s claims and the clinical findings significantly undermined the credibility of the testimony, the judges said.
“If one takes this alongside the fact that one of the supposed first responders did not testify without explanation why he would not, then there is a doubt created about the truthfulness of the victim’s evidence, the only direct evidence,” the court held.
The court reiterated the longstanding principle in criminal law that where there is doubt, it must be resolved in favor of the accused.
Prosecution concedes
In a noteworthy development during the appeal hearing, prosecution counsel conceded that the available evidence did not meet the threshold required to support a conviction.
The court recognised this concession as appropriate, given the gaps and inconsistencies in the case.
Verdict and release
The appellate judges allowed the appeal, quashed the conviction and set aside the sentence.
They ordered Mutunga be released immediately unless held for any other lawful reason.
“Ultimately, we allow the appeal. The appellant shall be released forthwith unless held for some other lawful reason,” the court ordered.
