Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission VS BILLY OBANGO AND WILLSTONE HOMES LIMITED AND 2 Others

1. What is before the court for ruling is the exparte Originating Motion dated the 27th day of March 2025.  The same is brought under Section 56 of the anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Act No.3 of 2003 and seeks the following orders: -
(1) That this Honourable court be pleased to certify the application as urgent and to admit if for hearing exparte on a priority basis.
(2) This Honourable court be pleased to issue an order prohibiting the 1st and 2nd Respondents by themselves, their agents or any other persons from transferring, disposing of or in any other way dealing with properties listed below: -
i.) House unit No. 9 and 21 Avana I Gardens Estate in Kamulu (Nairobi) constructed on property Title Number Nairobi/Block/26/307.
(3) THAT this Honourable court be pleased to issue an order prohibiting the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th Respondents by themselves, their agents, servants or any other persons from transferring, disposing of or in any other way dealing with the properties listed below: -
(i) House Unit No. 12 and 28 at Avana II Gardens Estate in Kamulu (Nairobi) constructed on property Title Number Nairobi/Block 126/302.
(4) THAT the Honourable Court be pleased to direct that the Orders in paragraphs 2 and 3 subsist for a period of six (6) months in line with the provisions of Section 56(3) of the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Act, No. 3 of 2003.
(5) THAT there be no orders as to costs.
2. The application is premised on grounds on its face and it’s supported by the annexed affidavit sworn by Anderson Weru Macharia, on the 27th March 2025.
3. The Applicant has averred that it is investigating allegations of abuse of office, conflict of interest, money laundering and embezzlement of public funds belonging to the National Treasury which were meant for the programme for Rural Outreach for Financial Innovations and Technologies (PROFIT).
4. That the preliminary investigations have established that the 1st Respondent was employed as an accountant at the National Treasury in 2017 and joined PROFIT as the programme accountant.
5. That the programme was founded by the National Government and the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) and it maintained an official account No. 01141419559400 at the Co-operative Bank with signatories being John Kautho, the programme coordinator, George Gichuru, the Senior Deputy Accountant General at the National Treasury and the 1st Respondent herein.
6. That the Applicant obtained warrants to investigate bank account number 1304251217 held at Kenya Commercial Bank, in the name of PROFIT which account was irregularly opened by the 1st Respondent herein, and one Gladys Oroni, a private citizen, with the first Respondent and Gladys Oroni as the signatories to that account.
7. That a total of Kshs.175,300,640.00 was paid to the unofficial account by the National Treasury and the money was paid out to six companies registered by Gladys Juliet Oroni Chepkarat and her two sons and other companies owned by the 1st Respondent’s proxies including Kaplan Logistics Limited and Blue Dart Company.  The two companies were also paid from PROFIT’s account No.01141419559400 at Co-operative Bank but they did not render any services to PROFIT.
8. That the properties the subject of this application were paid for, by the 1st Respondent through proxies and the Applicant has reasons to believe that the properties constitute proceeds of corrupt conduct or corruption which the applicant is mandated to seek recovery or forfeiture of from the 1st respondent.
9. That the Applicant is apprehensive that the 1st Respondent being aware of the ongoing transactions and the possible consequences, may in the intervening period transfer, dispose of or deal with the properties before the Applicant has completed its investigations and, therefore, there is need to preserve the properties.
10. The court has considered the above dispositions in support of the application and in my considered view, the Applicant has made a case to warrant granting of the orders sought in the application.
11. The application is allowed in terms of prayers 1, 2, 3 and 4.
12. No order is made on costs as this was an ex-parte application.