The High Court has found Abdullahi Mohamed Mohamud in contempt of court for interfering with the operations, assets and customers of Roshan Energies Limited despite orders barring him from doing so.
Justice Peter Mulwa ruled that Mohamud disobeyed orders issued on August 28, 2025, restraining him, his employees, agents and anyone acting on his behalf from interfering with the company's business activities on the disputed premises.
The judge ordered Mohamud to appear before the court and explain why he should not be committed to civil jail for six months over the breach.
The current dispute centres on premises where Roshan Energies was developing a petrol station and convenience store.
The court had earlier issued restraining orders barring Mohamud from interfering with the company's operations, assets and customers.
But the plaintiffs accused him of continuing to assert control over the premises and interfering with its property and business activities.
In their application, Abdiaziz Ali Hassan, Abdifatah Mohamed and the company alleged that Mohamud disregarded the court orders, vandalised company property and destroyed assets.
They further accused him of involvement in violent confrontations in which security personnel were assaulted, leaving some injured and requiring hospitalisation.
The plaintiffs also informed the court that Mohamud had been charged at the Makadara Law Courts with conspiracy to commit a felony in connection with the destruction of the company's property.
Mohamud denied the contempt allegations in a replying affidavit sworn on December 3, 2025.
He maintained that his actions were an attempt to report acts of vandalism to the police.
"That ever since I got a restraining order from this court, I have kept off the suit property in compliance with the order to ensure that justice is done in the right way," he stated in his response.
He also sought to justify his presence at the disputed premises by asserting an ownership interest and expressing concern over what he described as the looting of his property.
The plaintiffs, represented by lawyer Cecil Miller, sought to have Mohamud committed to civil jail for six months.
They also asked the court to order him to compensate the company for destroyed property and medical expenses incurred and to direct the Officer Commanding Station at Embakasi Police Station to ensure compliance with the existing orders.
In determining the application, Justice Mulwa found that the August 28, 2025 orders were clear and that Mohamud had been served with them.
The judge said the evidence established that he continued asserting physical and operational control over the premises, confronting security personnel and interfering with the company's property and business activities.
“The obligation to obey a court order does not depend on the merits of the order or the litigant's private view of his own entitlement,” Justice Mulwa observed.
He added that a party aggrieved by a court order must seek to have it set aside or appeal against it rather than disregard it.
“The Defendant's (Mohamud) claim of ownership is, in this context, a red herring. The question before this Court is not title to the property but compliance with a lawful order of this Court,” the judge said.
Justice Mulwa concluded that the breach was deliberate, noting that the alleged violence and destruction of property reinforced his finding that the conduct went beyond inadvertent non-compliance.
The court, however, declined to award compensation for the alleged destruction of property and medical expenses, saying the claims required specific proof of the amounts involved.
The plaintiffs were at liberty to pursue compensation separately.
The judge directed the OCS Embakasi Police Station to ensure compliance with the August 28 orders and provide security to the company's personnel and property.
He also awarded the plaintiffs the costs of the application
