Court declares police killing of businessman Bunty Shah unlawful
The fatal shooting occurred in the early hours of October 21, 2017, when police stormed Shah's compound using armoured vehicles. He was shot through a bedroom window as he tried to assess the commotion.
The Court of Appeal has declared that the killing of former Bobmil Group director Bunty Bharat Kumar Shah by masked police officers at his Westlands home eight years ago was unlawful and violated his constitutional rights.
A three-judge bench comprising Justices David Musinga, Mumbi Ngugi, and George Odunga ruled that the actions of the Attorney General, the Inspector General of Police, and the Cabinet Secretary for Interior breached the Constitution, which guarantees the right to life and parental care for children.
More To Read
- IPOA condemns rising attacks on police officers after constable is killed outside State House
- Boniface Mwangi summoned over social media post on police
- NPSC introduces tough measures against corruption in police hiring
- Woman files petition to revive torture charges against two senior police officers
- Public views to shape new security policies as nationwide Jukwaa la Usalama forums end
- KNCHR launches advisory on situation of human rights defenders in Kenya
"A declaration is hereby made that the action on the part of the AG, IG, and Interior CS, through their agents and officers, in executing and killing the late Bunty Shah was contrary to the provisions of the Constitution," the court stated.
The appellate court overturned a High Court ruling that had dismissed a petition filed by Shah's widow, Anjlee Parveen Kumar Sharma, terming it premature. The case will now return to the High Court for assessment of damages.
The judges clarified that constitutional courts are empowered to determine state liability for rights violations, while criminal courts address individual culpability. They rejected arguments by the State that constitutional remedies should await the completion of investigations, terming that view a "conflation of legal processes."
Sharma's petition sought compensation for multiple rights violations, including the right to life, dignity, and family. She demanded more than Sh730 million in damages for Shah's unlawful execution, emotional suffering, and loss of income and parental care for their minor son.
The fatal shooting occurred in the early hours of October 21, 2017, when police stormed Shah's compound using armoured vehicles. He was shot through a bedroom window as he tried to assess the commotion. Sharma claimed officers blocked an ambulance from entering and disabled CCTV cameras.
Despite her reports to the police, IPOA, and the DPP, she said no action was taken. The State, however, denied direct involvement, questioned the authenticity of CCTV footage, and maintained that investigations were ongoing.
The appellate court's decision now paves the way for compensation proceedings and possible accountability for those behind Shah's death.
Top Stories Today
