BY SAM ALFAN.
High Court has prohibited former Ministry of health and sanitation accountant Andrew Biketi Musuya from withdrawing or transferring funds in four different bank accounts.
“An order of injunction prohibiting Andrew Biketi Musuya/T/A Makuyu Petroleum Dealers his agents , servants or any other persons from withdrawing, transferring , disposing , wasting or any other way dealing with funds in equity bank in the name of Andrew Biketi Musuya in the name held at Co-Operative Bank and another bank accounts in the name of Makuyu Petroleum dealers”, ordered Justice Mumbi Ngugi.
The judge also issued orders restraining Biketi , business lady Salome Waleghwa and Wachenya Auto Garage from transferring or dealing with motor vehicles KBV 467Q Toyota Saloon ,KCH 124M Toyota Harrier and KCF 863S Toyota Prado respectively.
Further Biketi or his agents were barred from selling , charging , leasing, developing, subdividing or transferring several parcel of land.
The orders were granted after Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission moved to court under certificate urgency seeking to stop Biketi from withdrawing the money or transferring or selling the said property over allegations of being involved in corrupt dealings.
The agency told the court that they received a report that Biketi while serving as the accountant at the ministry of Public Health and Sanitation and later the County Government of Trans-Nzoia was involved in corrupt dealing and had amassed wealth that does not match his known legitimate of income.
On October 24, 2018 former Anti-Corruption presiding Judge Ong’undi granted preservation orders for a period of six months preserving monies totalling to Sh 15,755,824 held in various bank accounts in the name of Biketi and his business pending conclusion of investigations.
Judge Ngugi extended orders this year April 24 for further period of two months and same shall lapse on June 24.
Investigations has revealed that in the period of January 1, 2013 and October 31,2018, Biketi accumulated assets valued at Sh 284,087,664 way in excess of his cumulative know legitimate source of income amounting to Sh 5,845,245.75, being his total net salary and allowances from the Ministry of Public Health, Trans Nzoia County Government and from his part time job at Jomo Kenyatta university of Agriculture and Technology (JKUAT).
The Commission also established that Biketi in the period January 1, 2013 and October 31, 2018 the period which he is reasonably suspected of corruption acquired unexplained assets to the tune of Kshs. 284,087,664.25 made up as follows;
-Three high-end motor vehicles currently valued at a total of Kshs. 9,600,000.
-Landed properties currently valued Kshs. 226,800,000.
-Cash deposits totaling to Kshs. 45,534,656.00 in his various bank accounts excluding his salary.
-M-pesa cash deposits totaling Kshs. 7,998,254.00.
They said assets worth Kshs. 284,087,664.25 constitutes landed properties, motor vehicles and cash deposits some of which are subject of these proceedings and duly preserved while others were dissipated and were not available for preservation.
The Commission gave Biketi an opportunity to explain the sources of the above listed assets by issuing a statutory notice to him, requesting him, among other things, to furnish the Commission with a written statement enumerating his properties, the times at which the same were acquired and how the same were acquired pursuant to the provisions of Sections 26 and 55 of the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Act.
Biketi offered his explanation which explanation was not satisfactory to the Commission.
“It is reasonably suspected that the above stated properties were acquired by the Respondent through corruption and that the same should be forfeited to the Government of Kenya and the difference in value should be paid to the Government of Kenya as prayed in the Originating Summons herein”, said the commission.
The Commission is apprehensive that Biketi and
Salome Waleghwa, Bhinder Corporation Limited, Mildred Kerubo Obare, Wachenya Auto Garage who are in possession and control of the property listed in schedule 2A, 2B and 2C of the originating summons, shall seek to dispose of or transfer all or part of the properties in order to frustrate any decree that may be passed against them.
“There is real danger that if the court does not grant an injunction restraining the respondent and interested parties from withdrawing, disposing of, transferring and/or dealing with the properties involved, then the substratum of this application and Originating summons will be defeated rendering the same nugatory”, added the commission.
The Anti-graft agency further argued unless the orders sought are granted immediately and served prior to the expiry of the preservation orders, the efforts made and the orders granted to preserve the properties this far will be in vain.