1. Before the Court is an application for the adoption of the subject child, dated 29th October 2025, filed by the Applicant, Amina Kazungu.
2. In the said application, the Applicant seeks the following orders:
a) The Applicant be authorized to adopt the Abandoned Child alias Baby Oliver Khan;
b) The consent of the biological parents be dispensed with as the child was abandoned;
c) That upon making the adoption order, the said child be known as Jeremy Nathaniel Kazungu;
d) The Registrar General do make the appropriate entry of Jeremy Nathaniel Kazungu in the Adopted Children’s Register;
e) The child Jeremy Nathaniel Kazungu be presumed to be a Kenyan citizen by birth, and be issued with a Kenyan Passport; and
f) Sauda Wangari Kazungu and Joseph Ngigi Njoroge be appointed as legal guardians of the child.
3. In the statement in support of the application and in the affidavit, she described herself as a single lady residing in Rabai in Kilifi County. The applicant is an accountant with the Kenya Ports Authority. She averred that she is financially capable of caring for the child. In support of this contention, she attached bank statements, which this Court has perused.
4. Further, she stated that she was not related to the child, that she received the child into her care and possession on 24th December 2024, and that she has continuously cared for the child since then.
Evidence Adduced in Court
5. PW1 was Joy-Miriam Wanjiku Muhia, a social worker with Little Angels Network. She testified that the adoption agency approved the adoption application on 1st March 2023 and issued the certificate freeing the child for adoption. She further stated that the Applicant met all the legal requirements.
6. PW2 was Winfred Kambu Kaluku. Ms Kaluku is the county coordinator, Children Services, Kilifi. She testified that she conducted a home visit and that the child had bonded well with the Applicant and was attending school. She recommended the adoption.
7. PW3 was the Applicant. She testified that she works for the Kenya Ports Authority. She does not have biological children. She further testified that she is not married, had already been living with the child, and that they had already bonded well. She stated that she understands that adoption is permanent and that the child would inherit from her.
8. PW4 was David Eggesa Omongini. He works with KPA and is the Applicant's neighbour. Mr Omongini is the court-appointed guardian ad litem. He wrote a report that the child was well cared for. He recommended the adoption.
Analysis and Determination
9. I have considered the pleadings, the oral and documentary evidence, and the applicable law. In my view, the sole issue for determination is whether the court should allow the adoption application brought herein.
.
10. I have already set out the evidence of the witnesses. The court heard the relevant parties, who testified as PW1, PW2, PW3, and PW4, and also perused all documents filed with the court.
11. In particular, the Court notes the reports prepared by the guardian ad litem, the Children Officer and the Adoption Society, which were filed in court. All these reports certified that the Applicant met all the legal requirements and that she could adopt the minor herein.
12. As stated above, the court also heard from David Eggesa Omongini, the guardian ad litem of the minor, who testified that the Applicant was fit to adopt the child. The Applicant testified that she took the child in 2024 after the child had been abandoned, and that she had nurtured the child and enrolled him in school.
13. I have carefully considered the evidence adduced in this matter. The oral and documentary evidence shows that it would be in the child's best interest for the adoption order to issue.
14. In my view, the Applicant meets all the legal requirements for adoption. There is no doubt that this adoption is intended to protect, support, provide for and maintain the child.
15. The Applicant is committed to and able to care for and maintain the child, as she has already done so solely. That being the case, it is my view that the adoption application herein will be in the child’s best interests.
16. In light of the foregoing, I find and hold that the application has merit. The application is allowed as prayed.
Final Orders
17. The upshot of the foregoing is that I make the following Orders:
(i) The Applicant, Amina Kazungu, is hereby authorized to adopt the Abandoned Child aka Baby Oliver Khan;
(ii) The consent of the biological parents of the child to the adoption is hereby dispensed with as the child was abandoned;
(iii) The Abandoned Child aka Baby Oliver Khan shall henceforth be known as Jeremy Nathaniel Kazungu;
(iv) The Registrar General is hereby ordered to make an appropriate entry in respect of Master Jeremy Nathaniel Kazungu in the Adopted Children’s Register and to list his estimated date of birth as being 6th March 2022;
(v) Sauda Wangari Kazungu and Joseph Ngigi Njoroge are hereby appointed as the legal guardians of the child;
(vi) The guardian ad litem is hereby discharged; and
(vii) The file is closed.
18. This being a non-contentious adoption matter, I make no orders as to costs.
Dated and signed at Mombasa this 17th day of March 2026. Judgment delivered through Microsoft TEAMS.
2. In the said application, the Applicant seeks the following orders:
a) The Applicant be authorized to adopt the Abandoned Child alias Baby Oliver Khan;
b) The consent of the biological parents be dispensed with as the child was abandoned;
c) That upon making the adoption order, the said child be known as Jeremy Nathaniel Kazungu;
d) The Registrar General do make the appropriate entry of Jeremy Nathaniel Kazungu in the Adopted Children’s Register;
e) The child Jeremy Nathaniel Kazungu be presumed to be a Kenyan citizen by birth, and be issued with a Kenyan Passport; and
f) Sauda Wangari Kazungu and Joseph Ngigi Njoroge be appointed as legal guardians of the child.
3. In the statement in support of the application and in the affidavit, she described herself as a single lady residing in Rabai in Kilifi County. The applicant is an accountant with the Kenya Ports Authority. She averred that she is financially capable of caring for the child. In support of this contention, she attached bank statements, which this Court has perused.
4. Further, she stated that she was not related to the child, that she received the child into her care and possession on 24th December 2024, and that she has continuously cared for the child since then.
Evidence Adduced in Court
5. PW1 was Joy-Miriam Wanjiku Muhia, a social worker with Little Angels Network. She testified that the adoption agency approved the adoption application on 1st March 2023 and issued the certificate freeing the child for adoption. She further stated that the Applicant met all the legal requirements.
6. PW2 was Winfred Kambu Kaluku. Ms Kaluku is the county coordinator, Children Services, Kilifi. She testified that she conducted a home visit and that the child had bonded well with the Applicant and was attending school. She recommended the adoption.
7. PW3 was the Applicant. She testified that she works for the Kenya Ports Authority. She does not have biological children. She further testified that she is not married, had already been living with the child, and that they had already bonded well. She stated that she understands that adoption is permanent and that the child would inherit from her.
8. PW4 was David Eggesa Omongini. He works with KPA and is the Applicant's neighbour. Mr Omongini is the court-appointed guardian ad litem. He wrote a report that the child was well cared for. He recommended the adoption.
Analysis and Determination
9. I have considered the pleadings, the oral and documentary evidence, and the applicable law. In my view, the sole issue for determination is whether the court should allow the adoption application brought herein.
.
10. I have already set out the evidence of the witnesses. The court heard the relevant parties, who testified as PW1, PW2, PW3, and PW4, and also perused all documents filed with the court.
11. In particular, the Court notes the reports prepared by the guardian ad litem, the Children Officer and the Adoption Society, which were filed in court. All these reports certified that the Applicant met all the legal requirements and that she could adopt the minor herein.
12. As stated above, the court also heard from David Eggesa Omongini, the guardian ad litem of the minor, who testified that the Applicant was fit to adopt the child. The Applicant testified that she took the child in 2024 after the child had been abandoned, and that she had nurtured the child and enrolled him in school.
13. I have carefully considered the evidence adduced in this matter. The oral and documentary evidence shows that it would be in the child's best interest for the adoption order to issue.
14. In my view, the Applicant meets all the legal requirements for adoption. There is no doubt that this adoption is intended to protect, support, provide for and maintain the child.
15. The Applicant is committed to and able to care for and maintain the child, as she has already done so solely. That being the case, it is my view that the adoption application herein will be in the child’s best interests.
16. In light of the foregoing, I find and hold that the application has merit. The application is allowed as prayed.
Final Orders
17. The upshot of the foregoing is that I make the following Orders:
(i) The Applicant, Amina Kazungu, is hereby authorized to adopt the Abandoned Child aka Baby Oliver Khan;
(ii) The consent of the biological parents of the child to the adoption is hereby dispensed with as the child was abandoned;
(iii) The Abandoned Child aka Baby Oliver Khan shall henceforth be known as Jeremy Nathaniel Kazungu;
(iv) The Registrar General is hereby ordered to make an appropriate entry in respect of Master Jeremy Nathaniel Kazungu in the Adopted Children’s Register and to list his estimated date of birth as being 6th March 2022;
(v) Sauda Wangari Kazungu and Joseph Ngigi Njoroge are hereby appointed as the legal guardians of the child;
(vi) The guardian ad litem is hereby discharged; and
(vii) The file is closed.
18. This being a non-contentious adoption matter, I make no orders as to costs.
Dated and signed at Mombasa this 17th day of March 2026. Judgment delivered through Microsoft TEAMS.