Court of Appeal halts Kamani defence in Sh3.5bn anglo leasing case

Kamani brothers/DPP

The Court of Appeal of Kenya has temporarily suspended defence proceedings in the Sh3.5 billion Anglo Leasing case involving businessmen Deepak Kamani and Rashmi Chamanlal Kamani.

This followed the court’s finding that the brothers’ intended appeal was arguable and raised significant issues requiring urgent consideration.

The stay was disclosed on Thursday during proceedings before the Anti-Corruption Court, where trial magistrate Harrison Barasa was informed that the appellate court had halted the defence hearing pending the determination of the appeal.

Through their lawyer Abdinasir Mohammed, the Kamani brothers moved to the Court of Appeal seeking a stay after the High Court directed them to respond in the long-running Anglo Leasing case.

The appellate court said the appeal merited consideration before the trial could proceed.

The appeal stems from a decision by Anti-Corruption High Court judge Benjamin Musyoki, who set aside the acquittal of the Kamani brothers and former permanent secretaries Joseph Magari, Dave Mwangi, and David Onyonka.

Justice Musyoki noted that the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) had established a prima facie case against the individuals in relation to the Sh3.5 billion Anglo Leasing matter.

In ordering the Kamani brothers to respond, Justice Musyoki said they were expected to explain why funds linked to the disputed security contract had been received.

The judge referred to the money being channelled through a finance corporation, noting circumstances the prosecution said suggested the funds were linked to the contract.

The Kamani brothers have denied any involvement with the finance corporation and maintain that they have no connection to the entity, despite claims presented by the prosecution regarding its role in the case.

During subsequent proceedings at the trial court, counsel for the Kamani brothers argued that a stay of proceedings was necessary to prevent potential embarrassment or prejudice should the Court of Appeal overturn the High Court’s decision reinstating the matter for response.

However, lawyers for the former permanent secretaries, led by senior counsel Fred Ngatia, urged the court to allow the proceedings concerning their clients to continue, stating they should not be delayed by the Kamani brothers’ appeal.

They indicated readiness to take directions on the proceedings.

At the time, the trial court declined to split the joint matter, noting that no stay orders had been issued by a superior court.

“The intended appeal is not against the orders of this court. The Court of Appeal has its own rules under which it can make orders, including orders of stay of proceedings,” Magistrate Barasa said.

Following confirmation that the Kamani brothers had secured a stay from the Court of Appeal, Magistrate Barasa directed that the matter be mentioned in May to confirm the status of the appeal.

“We can mention the matter virtually on May 19, 2026, to follow up on the progress of the appeal. You (defence counsel) will be updating the court on the progress until the same is determined,” he stated.

All the individuals involved have denied any wrongdoing.