The Judiciary/FILEThe High Court has dismissed a petition by Joseph Wachira seeking to stop investigations by the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) into allegations that he and two others solicited a Sh10 million bribe to influence a judge’s ruling in a commercial dispute.
Justice Joseph Kipkoech Biomdo ruled that Wachira had failed to demonstrate that the commission’s investigations were unlawful or conducted outside its legal mandate.
The judge also found that the EACC did not entrap Wachira during a meeting on March 9, 2026, when investigators arrested him and two others over the alleged bribery scheme.
“The 2nd Respondent’s (EACC) role was strictly limited to facilitating the collection of evidence. It neither set up the meeting nor influenced the discussions therein. Based on these facts, I find that there was no entrapment,” Justice Biomdo ruled.
The petition arose from a complaint lodged with the EACC on March 9 by a man, who alleged that Wachira, and two others had requested Sh10 million intended for a sitting judge.
The money was allegedly meant to secure a favourable ruling in a commercial dispute involving Dari Ltd and Raphael Tuju against Garam Investment Auctioneers and others in case number HCCOMM/E636/2024.
According to the EACC, the complainant reported that the three had arranged to meet at Entim Sidai Wellness Sanctuary in Karen to discuss the matter.
The commission said it provided the complainant with a recording device and treated money before accompanying him to the venue. The judgement notes that the Investigators arrested the three after the complainant signalled them.
During the meeting, the complainant allegedly produced Sh1 million in treated currency, which investigators recovered during the operation.
Wachira in his defence, however, denied soliciting or receiving a bribe, arguing that the money had been produced without his request or prior discussion.
He maintained that the operation was a pre-arranged entrapment and that the evidence against him had been deliberately fabricated.
He also accused the respondents of leaking recordings of his arrest to the public, damaging his reputation.
But Justice Biomdo said the available material showed that the meeting had been arranged before the investigators became involved and that the commission acted on a complaint alleging criminal conduct.
The judge further declined to halt the investigations, saying the petitioner had not established exceptional circumstances warranting the court’s intervention.
“The petitioner has failed to demonstrate that the EACC’s probe has crossed the high threshold of malice, clear lack of factual foundation, illegality, or ultra vires action to warrant judicial interference,” the judge said.
The court also held that disputes over the competing accounts of the events and the significance of evidence would require evaluation at trial rather than at the investigative stage.
Justice Biomdo said no formal charges had been preferred against Wachira at the time of the judgment, meaning questions about the admissibility of evidence and the fairness of any future trial remained premature.
“The petition cannot succeed,” the judge ruled, dismissing the case and vacating all interim orders that had suspended Wachira’s arrest and prosecution.
