I have considered the application dated 15 th June, 2026 seeking to review my orders declining to grant the application. In the affidavit in support of the application, the counsel suggests that I declined to grant the adjournment on the ground that the counsel had not filed a notice of change of advocates. That is not the correct position. In my ruling this morning, I held that the reasons for me to decline granting adjournment was that the reasons advanced were not convincing.
This matter was adjourned for defence hearing on 17/11/2025. On that date, Mr. Seko held brief for Mr. Juma. I am now told that Mr. Seko held the brief because he reached out to Mr. Juma after he failed to show up. That is an indication that the relationship between Mr. Juma and his clients had started to wane. On 13 th of April, 2026, a Miss Obura held brief for Mr. Seko for all the defendants when this date was taken.
It is not prudent for the defendants to sit back and instruct counsel on the eve of the defence hearing and seek adjournment on grounds that their counsel is new in the matter.
There is no evidence that there was an agreement between Mr. Seko and Mr. Juma that the 2 nd and 3 rd defendants would go first. The order made on 13 th April, 2026 was that defense hearing would be today and 18 th June 2026.
The application for adjournment is hereby denied. I see no reason to review my earlier ruling. The matter shall proceed for defence hearing as scheduled.
Dated signed and delivered at Nairobi this 15 th day of June 2026.
B.M. MUSYOKI
JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT .
2 | Page
This matter was adjourned for defence hearing on 17/11/2025. On that date, Mr. Seko held brief for Mr. Juma. I am now told that Mr. Seko held the brief because he reached out to Mr. Juma after he failed to show up. That is an indication that the relationship between Mr. Juma and his clients had started to wane. On 13 th of April, 2026, a Miss Obura held brief for Mr. Seko for all the defendants when this date was taken.
It is not prudent for the defendants to sit back and instruct counsel on the eve of the defence hearing and seek adjournment on grounds that their counsel is new in the matter.
There is no evidence that there was an agreement between Mr. Seko and Mr. Juma that the 2 nd and 3 rd defendants would go first. The order made on 13 th April, 2026 was that defense hearing would be today and 18 th June 2026.
The application for adjournment is hereby denied. I see no reason to review my earlier ruling. The matter shall proceed for defence hearing as scheduled.
Dated signed and delivered at Nairobi this 15 th day of June 2026.
B.M. MUSYOKI
JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT .
2 | Page