The High Court in Kibera has
partially allowed an appeal by a businessman convicted in a
multi-million-shilling fraud linked to fake government tenders.
Justice Diana Kavedza, on August 28,
2025, set aside the conviction of Vincent Sammy Ndirangu Wambui on one of two
counts, ruling that the prosecution failed to produce key evidence.
Wambui had been convicted by the Kibera Chief Magistrate’s Court in May 2025 for obtaining money by false pretences and making a false document.
He was ordered to pay a fine of Sh5
million or serve one and a half years in prison for the first offence, and two
years’ imprisonment for the second. The sentences were to run consecutively.
The appeal stemmed from a 2015
scheme in which businessman Michael Githongo Gitahi lost over Sh7.2 million in
a purported supply contract for ball bearings to the Ministry of Roads and
Transport.
Gitahi testified that he was introduced to a woman identified as Peninah, later revealed as Christine Wanjiru Gikunju, by a man known only as Mitchell.
Peninah claimed she had a
Local Purchase Order for the supply of ball bearings to the Standard Gauge
Railway project, but needed financial support.
On August 19, 2015, Gitahi deposited Sh2.5 million into an account belonging to Virash General Merchants, a company owned by Wambui.
A week later, Peninah issued him five post-dated cheques of Sh840,000 each.
She later persuaded him to advance further amounts, producing
delivery notes and invoices as proof that goods had been supplied.
By September 2015, Gitahi had deposited more than Sh7.2 million into the Virash account and handed over cash payments.
He was later presented with another LPO valued at Sh4.8 million.
Gitahi eventually discovered that the documents were false and no deliveries had been made.
He said Peninah promised to refund the money, but failed.
“I dealt directly with Peninah. I witnessed her writing the post-dated cheques and signing the agreements,” Gitahi told the court.
He stressed that his dealings were never with Wambui.
Other witnesses, including advocate Steven Muhia, confirmed that contracts were signed between Gitahi and Peninah.
Forensic experts testified that handwriting on disputed documents matched Peninah’s and that the LPOs carried forged stamps.
But the money trail pointed to Wambui. Bank records showed millions were deposited into his company’s account.
The investigating officer testified that Datanomics East Africa, a company tied
to Peninah, was also part of the scheme.
In his defence, Wambui admitted receiving the money but said he was only a conduit for Mitchell, whom he described as a supplier to the National Youth Service.
He claimed Mitchell had
subcontracted him to deliver 1,125 ball bearings at Sh6,000 each. He produced
delivery books and his company registration documents.
He insisted he had no dealings with
Gitahi or Peninah and only met them after the case began. “I dealt with
Mitchell and not with the complainant or the 1st accused,” Wambui said.
His defence was backed by a
subcontractor who said he delivered goods at Wambui’s request, though he did
not know the contents of the cartons. A defence document examiner also disputed
the prosecution’s handwriting analysis.
The trial court dismissed Wambui’s
defence and convicted him on both counts.
In her judgment, Justice Kavedza upheld the conviction for obtaining money by false pretences.
She said the
prosecution had proved that Gitahi was induced to part with money based on
false representations of a government tender.
“The complainant was induced to
transfer Sh2.5 million twice and an additional Sh1.78 million into the
appellant’s bank account. Bank records confirmed the money was received. The
appellant did not dispute this,” the judge said.
She added that Wambui failed to offer
a credible explanation for the funds. “His explanation remained bare and
uncorroborated. His conduct was not consistent with that of an innocent agent,”
the court held.
However, the High Court found that
the second conviction for making a false document was unsafe. The charge was
based on an alleged forged Local Purchase Order, but the document was never
produced in court.
“The LPO, which formed the basis of
the charge, was never produced. Without the production of the document, the
court could not assess its form, content, or authenticity. Failure to produce
it leaves the court with nothing but bare allegations,” Justice Kavedza ruled.
She said the trial court erred in concluding the LPO was a forgery when it had not been tendered in evidence.
“Such a finding amounts to speculation rather than a reasoned judicial
determination,” she said, citing a precedent case.
The judge quashed the conviction and
sentence on Count II.
On sentencing, Justice Kavedza also
adjusted the penalty on Count I. She noted that Section 28 of the Penal Code
caps default sentences for fines above Sh50,000 at 12 months. The trial court
had imposed one and a half years.
“The default sentence of one and a
half years ran afoul of Section 28 of the Penal Code. The trial court should
have imposed a default sentence of 12 months,” the judge said.
She therefore substituted the sentence with a fine of Sh5 million or, in default, 12 months in prison.
Justice Kavedza delivered the
judgment virtually, noting that the appeal was only partly successful.
“The conviction and sentence imposed in Count II is hereby quashed and set aside," she ordered.
“The conviction for obtaining money by false pretences is upheld.”
