The Lower Eastern Times Opening The Third Eye
Tech entrepreneur Ndiangui Kinyagia has been awarded Sh5 million in damages after the High Court ruled that a police search of his home in 2025 violated his constitutional rights.
The case arose from a June 21, 2025 raid at Kinyagia’s residence in Kinoo, Kiambu County. Police officers visited the property as part of an investigation and, after failing to find him, entered the house and seized several items.
Kinyagia went into hiding after learning about the raid, saying he feared for his safety. His disappearance prompted his mother to seek help from the Law Society of Kenya, which assisted in initiating habeas corpus proceedings to establish his whereabouts.
He later emerged and informed the court that he had deliberately gone into hiding because of concerns about his safety. The habeas corpus proceedings were subsequently concluded, after which he filed a separate constitutional petition challenging the search, seizure of his belongings and the manner in which the investigation was conducted.
Justice Patricia Mande ruled that the Director of Criminal Investigations (DCI) and Inspector General of Police Douglas Kanja had violated Kinyagia’s constitutional rights to privacy and property.
The court also found violations of his rights to dignity, personal security and freedom of movement.
Justice Mande said the authorities had failed to establish circumstances that would have legally permitted them to conduct the search without first obtaining a warrant.
The judge further ruled that the seizure of Kinyagia’s belongings violated his right to property under Article 40 of the Constitution.
The court noted that the incident had also affected Kinyagia’s sense of safety and dignity. A psychological assessment presented to the court indicated that he had experienced significant psychological distress following the events.
According to the judgment, Kinyagia’s decision to hide after learning that suspected police officers had visited his home was a reasonable response to the circumstances rather than an unfounded fear.
Justice Mande said the actions of state agents effectively restricted his freedom of movement because they caused him to leave his home out of concern for his safety.
The court emphasised that constitutional protections apply to everyone, including people who are vulnerable or frightened, and that public authorities must exercise their powers within the limits of the law.
The judge also considered investigators’ subsequent efforts to subject the seized electronic devices to forensic analysis. She concluded that the alleged violations were central to the investigation rather than isolated incidents.
The court found that investigators had conducted the search and seized property before attempting to establish a lawful basis for their actions.
As a result, Justice Mande barred the Director of Public Prosecutions from initiating criminal proceedings against Kinyagia arising from the investigative process undertaken by the authorities.
The court awarded Kinyagia Sh5 million in general damages, to be paid jointly by the DCI and the Inspector General of Police.
The amount will attract interest from the date of judgment until it is fully paid. The respondents were also ordered to meet the costs of the case.
