A chilling tale of betrayal and abuse that shook a quiet village in Nyandarua County reached its legal conclusion this month as the Court of Appeal upheld a life sentence against a man found guilty of defiling a six-year-old girl in a maize plantation.
The case revolved around a harrowing incident that took place on the morning of November 24, 2013.
The victim’s mother, identified in court documents as CW to protect the identity of the child, left her home to deliver milk at a nearby shopping centre, entrusting her four children to each other.
When CW returned at around 11 am, she encountered a scene that no parent should face.
Three of her children emerged from a neighbour’s compound, but her youngest daughter, referred to in court as MMW, was missing.
Her son explained that their neighbour, identified as John Muraya (the appellant), had asked them to go fetch cow fodder, leaving MMW behind.
Alarmed, CW rushed home and, upon not finding her daughter, began calling out her name.
Moments later, MMW emerged from the maize crops behind their house, limping, her shorts awkwardly bunched on one side.
The child was silent, refusing to respond to her mother’s desperate questions.
Eventually, under pressure and physical force, she revealed the truth: Muraya had taken her to the maize field, sexually assaulted her and warned her not to tell anyone.
“He carried me and took me to the maize. He removed my shorts and panty. He also removed his trouser. He lay on top of me and did tabia mbaya to me in between my legs,” the young girl later told the court, as recorded in the trial judgment.
CW immediately inspected her daughter and noticed clear signs of trauma: a wet undergarment with white discharge, and bruising and redness around the genital area.
She rushed the child to Olkalou District Hospital, where a clinical officer examined her.
Testifying in court, the doctor described the child’s injuries in graphic detail.
He observed that she had difficulty walking, tenderness, lacerations and a foul-smelling discharge.
A High Vaginal Swab (HVS) test confirmed the presence of spermatozoa, red blood cells, and pus cells—evidence consistent with sexual penetration and infection.
Despite this damning evidence, Muraya denied the charges. In his defence, he claimed he had been framed by the girl’s parents.
He alleged that the girl’s father had once asked him to work for him, which he declined, causing bad blood between them.
He also claimed that a woman had asked him why he wouldn’t marry her and that his rejection had led to the false accusation.
Muraya further alleged that he overheard a woman asking the girl, “Who did this to you?” and that the child replied, “Njuguna.”
According to Muraya, the woman stated that she would instigate a case against Njuguna, prompting him to warn him to be cautious.
Nevertheless, both the trial court and the High Court rejected his defence.
The courts found that the evidence of the complainant, her mother, and the clinical officer was credible, consistent and compelling.
They concluded that Muraya was the perpetrator of the heinous crime.
The minor had clearly identified Muraya, who lived in a neighbouring house, as the attacker.
Her account was vivid and detailed, and the medical evidence supported her narrative.
The trial magistrate found that the prosecution had met the threshold of proving the case beyond a reasonable doubt.
Muraya appealed the conviction and sentence to the High Court, which dismissed the appeal.
Undeterred, he proceeded to the Court of Appeal, raising three main grounds: that the prosecution had not proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt, that his defence had been ignored, and that the sentence of life imprisonment was harsh and excessive.
In its judgment delivered on May 9, 2025, the Court of Appeal in Nakuru, comprising Justices Mohamed Warsame, John Mativo, and Mwaniki Gachoka, upheld the decisions of the lower courts.
The court held that the age of the victim had been adequately proved.
CW had testified that MMW was born on December 12, 2007, and was in Standard One at the time of the incident.
The trial court, having observed the child, was satisfied that she was under 11 years old.
The medical report confirming her age was admissible under Section 77 of the Evidence Act.
As for the claim of a setup, the appellate court was blunt. “The appellant failed to provide any independent evidence to substantiate his claims,” the ruling read, describing his defence as “shambolic and mere assertions.”
Muraya’s final complaint, that a life sentence was harsh and indefinite, was also dismissed. The court cited Section 8(2) of the Sexual Offences Act, which mandates a life sentence for anyone convicted of defiling a child.
“We confirm the appellant’s conviction and sentence and dismiss his appeal in its entirety,” the judges ruled.
