1. This Judgment is in respect of the Originating Summons dated 22nd January 2026 and filed in court seeking an adoption order in respect of the subject minor.
2. The Application seeks the following orders:
a) The Applicant be authorized to adopt the child Baby Reighn Baraka alias Reign Baraka;
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 Levine James Otieno;
d) The Registrar General do make the appropriate entry of Levine James Otieno and the estimated date of birth of the child as 25th November 2023; and
e) Thomas Kitinya Kirina and Lorine Auma Owuor be appointed as the legal guardians of the child;
3. The Applicants described themselves as married to each other since 2015. They have no biological children of their own.
4. Further, they stated that they were not related to the child, that they received the child into their care and possession on 24th April 2025, and that they had continuously cared for him since then.
Evidence
5. PW1 was Louisa Kemuma, the children's officer. She conducted a home visit. She filed the children's office report. She recommended the adoption.
6. PW2 was Joy Miriam Wanjiku. She was the social worker with Little Angels Network. Ms Wanjiku testified that the Applicants made an application and it was assessed and approved. According to her, the Applicants met all the legal requirements for the adoption.
7. PW3 was David Otieno Ogiga. He is a businessman staying in Nyali, Links Road. He does not have biological children. He was married to the co-Applicant. It was his testimony that adoption is permanent and that the child would be entitled to inherit from his estate.
8. PW4 was Roselyne Awuor Kitinya. She is the co-applicant. She is married to David Otieno Ogiga. They have no biological children. She testified that they wanted to adopt the child as their own and take care of him as such. She also knew the child would be entitled to inherit from them.
9. PW5 was Martha Njoki Gachocho. She was the court-appointed guardian ad litem. She stays in Bamburi. Ms Gachocho relied on her report, which recommended the adoption.
Analysis
10. I have considered the pleadings and the evidence adduced. In my view, the sole issue for determination is whether an adoption order should be made in respect of the instant application.
11. The court has considered the applicable law, the evidence of the parties who gave evidence before it and the documentary evidence presented.
12. The reports by the guardian ad litem, the Children Officer and the adoption society were filed in court. All these reports certified that the applicants met the legal requirements to adopt the minor herein.
13. The court also heard the oral testimony of the guardian ad litem for the minor. She testified that the Joint Applicants were fit to adopt the child and vouched for the adoption. On their part, the Joint Applicants, in their capacity as the proposed adoptive parents of the minor, testified that they took custody of the child on 24th April 2025. They further gave evidence that the child had been abandoned by his parents. Since gaining custody of the proposed adoptive child, they had nurtured him and were living with him.
14. All the evidence supported the Applicants’ proposal to adopt the child.
15. In my view, the Joint Applicants, as supported by the evidence on record, have met the legal requirements for adoption. This adoption is clearly intended to protect, support, provide for, and maintain the child.
16. The reports filed in Court support the application. They describe the Joint Applicants as committed and able to care for and maintain the child, as they have already done so solely, and hold the view that the adoption sought herein will be in the child’s best interests.
17. In the circumstances, it is my view that the application has merit. The same is allowed as prayed.
Final Orders
18. The upshot of the foregoing is that I make the following Orders:
(i) The Joint Applicants, David Otieno Ogiga and Roselyne Awuor Kittinya are authorized to adopt the child Baby Reighn Baraka alias Reign Baraka;
(ii) The consent of the biological parents is dispensed with as the child was abandoned;
(iii) The child, Baby Reighn Baraka alias Reign Baraka, shall henceforth be known as Levine James Otieno;
(iv) The Registrar General do make the appropriate entry of Levine James Otieno and the estimated date of his birth as being 25th November 2023.
(v) Thomas Kitinya Kirina and Lorine Auma Owuor are hereby appointed as the legal guardians of the child in the event that the Joint Applicants become deceased or are otherwise unable to take care of Levine James Otieno before he attains the age of 18;
(vi) The guardian ad litem is hereby discharged; and
(vii) The file is closed
Dated and signed at Mombasa this 9th day of April 2026. Judgment delivered through Microsoft TEAMS.
2. The Application seeks the following orders:
a) The Applicant be authorized to adopt the child Baby Reighn Baraka alias Reign Baraka;
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 Levine James Otieno;
d) The Registrar General do make the appropriate entry of Levine James Otieno and the estimated date of birth of the child as 25th November 2023; and
e) Thomas Kitinya Kirina and Lorine Auma Owuor be appointed as the legal guardians of the child;
3. The Applicants described themselves as married to each other since 2015. They have no biological children of their own.
4. Further, they stated that they were not related to the child, that they received the child into their care and possession on 24th April 2025, and that they had continuously cared for him since then.
Evidence
5. PW1 was Louisa Kemuma, the children's officer. She conducted a home visit. She filed the children's office report. She recommended the adoption.
6. PW2 was Joy Miriam Wanjiku. She was the social worker with Little Angels Network. Ms Wanjiku testified that the Applicants made an application and it was assessed and approved. According to her, the Applicants met all the legal requirements for the adoption.
7. PW3 was David Otieno Ogiga. He is a businessman staying in Nyali, Links Road. He does not have biological children. He was married to the co-Applicant. It was his testimony that adoption is permanent and that the child would be entitled to inherit from his estate.
8. PW4 was Roselyne Awuor Kitinya. She is the co-applicant. She is married to David Otieno Ogiga. They have no biological children. She testified that they wanted to adopt the child as their own and take care of him as such. She also knew the child would be entitled to inherit from them.
9. PW5 was Martha Njoki Gachocho. She was the court-appointed guardian ad litem. She stays in Bamburi. Ms Gachocho relied on her report, which recommended the adoption.
Analysis
10. I have considered the pleadings and the evidence adduced. In my view, the sole issue for determination is whether an adoption order should be made in respect of the instant application.
11. The court has considered the applicable law, the evidence of the parties who gave evidence before it and the documentary evidence presented.
12. The reports by the guardian ad litem, the Children Officer and the adoption society were filed in court. All these reports certified that the applicants met the legal requirements to adopt the minor herein.
13. The court also heard the oral testimony of the guardian ad litem for the minor. She testified that the Joint Applicants were fit to adopt the child and vouched for the adoption. On their part, the Joint Applicants, in their capacity as the proposed adoptive parents of the minor, testified that they took custody of the child on 24th April 2025. They further gave evidence that the child had been abandoned by his parents. Since gaining custody of the proposed adoptive child, they had nurtured him and were living with him.
14. All the evidence supported the Applicants’ proposal to adopt the child.
15. In my view, the Joint Applicants, as supported by the evidence on record, have met the legal requirements for adoption. This adoption is clearly intended to protect, support, provide for, and maintain the child.
16. The reports filed in Court support the application. They describe the Joint Applicants as committed and able to care for and maintain the child, as they have already done so solely, and hold the view that the adoption sought herein will be in the child’s best interests.
17. In the circumstances, it is my view that the application has merit. The same is allowed as prayed.
Final Orders
18. The upshot of the foregoing is that I make the following Orders:
(i) The Joint Applicants, David Otieno Ogiga and Roselyne Awuor Kittinya are authorized to adopt the child Baby Reighn Baraka alias Reign Baraka;
(ii) The consent of the biological parents is dispensed with as the child was abandoned;
(iii) The child, Baby Reighn Baraka alias Reign Baraka, shall henceforth be known as Levine James Otieno;
(iv) The Registrar General do make the appropriate entry of Levine James Otieno and the estimated date of his birth as being 25th November 2023.
(v) Thomas Kitinya Kirina and Lorine Auma Owuor are hereby appointed as the legal guardians of the child in the event that the Joint Applicants become deceased or are otherwise unable to take care of Levine James Otieno before he attains the age of 18;
(vi) The guardian ad litem is hereby discharged; and
(vii) The file is closed
Dated and signed at Mombasa this 9th day of April 2026. Judgment delivered through Microsoft TEAMS.