The High Court has stopped alleged threats, harassment and intimidation against the family of a woman whose husband, a Kenya Defence Forces (KDF) captain facing a murder charge, is accused of targeting relatives of the deceased, after granting interim protection orders pending the hearing of a case filed by the family.
In orders issued by the Nakuru Magistrate's Court on June 24, Senior Principal Magistrate Adet Vincent Okello restrained KDF Captain Edwin Muthomi Kaunga, either directly or through agents, servants or proxies, from harassing, tormenting, intimidating or threatening applicant Serah Nyokabi Mugweru and her family pending the hearing and determination of the application.
The court also directed the Officer Commanding Station (OCS) at Nakuru Police Station to oversee compliance with the orders and ensure their enforcement. The application will be heard inter partes on July 7.
The application was filed by Serah Nyokabi Mugweru, a relative of the late Ann Mugweru, who told the court that Kaunga, who is charged with murdering his wife, had continued to threaten and intimidate members of her family despite being in custody.
Former Nairobi Governor Mike Kioko Mbuvi Sonko has been listed as an interested party in the proceedings.
According to the court documents, the applicant alleged that the threats were being made through a mobile phone number allegedly used from prison, causing fear among family members still reeling from the death of their kin.
“Shockingly, upon being taken into custody, the Respondent herein has since been threatening, harassing, intimidating and tormenting my family and me,” Serah stated in her supporting affidavit.
She further alleged that callers identifying themselves as Edwin had contacted various relatives and threatened the child of the deceased.
“The said phone number has reached out to various members of my family, threatening that he would come for the child of the deceased and the Respondent herein,” the affidavit states.
The family told the court that although they could not independently verify ownership of the phone number, the caller consistently identified himself as the respondent.
In seeking urgent intervention, the applicant argued that the alleged intimidation was likely to continue unless the court intervened.
“My family and I are therefore apprehensive that the said threats and acts of intimidation are likely to continue unless the Court herein steps in and arrests the situation,” she stated.
The court will determine on July 7 whether the interim protection orders should remain in force and whether permanent orders should be granted.
Comments
Sign in with Google to comment, reply, and like comments.
Continue with Google