By Andrew Kariuki

The High Court in Nairobi has sentenced a 33 year old woman to 10 years in prison after she pleaded guilty to manslaughter in the killing of her co-wife following a domestic dispute in 2022.

In the judgment delivered at the Milimani Law Courts, Justice Kanyi Kimondo found that the circumstances of the offence warranted a custodial sentence, citing the severity of the attack and its lasting impact on the victim’s family.

The accused, Sarah Namono, had initially faced a murder charge but entered into a plea agreement on October 1, 2025, admitting to the lesser offence of manslaughter.

By that time, two prosecution witnesses had already testified in the case.

The court noted that the conviction was based entirely on facts admitted by the accused in the plea agreement.

According to the facts presented, the incident stemmed from a dispute between Namono and her co-wife, Grace Kibone, on September 22, 2022, at their husband’s business premises along Juja Road in Nairobi.

During the altercation, the deceased reportedly poured out food that belonged to the accused, triggering a confrontation between the two women.

Although they were separated, the accused left the scene after allegedly concealing a knife in her clothing and warning that it would be the last time the deceased would see their husband.

The following evening at about 9:30 p.m., Namono returned to the premises and attacked Kibone with the knife.

The court heard that she stabbed the deceased, who fell to the ground, before continuing to inflict injuries to her neck and face.

The accused then pushed her into a nearby trench and threw stones at her as she attempted to escape, while issuing threats to a witness who tried to intervene.

Kibone was rushed to hospital but later succumbed to her injuries.

A post-mortem examination established that she died from massive bleeding caused by a deep wound to the neck.

Namono was arrested by members of the public, who assaulted her before police intervened and took her for treatment and subsequent detention.

In sentencing, the court considered mitigation presented by the accused, who expressed remorse and described the deceased as her friend.

She also told the court that they had jointly raised children who now depend on her and asked for leniency.

However, a pre-sentence report prepared by the probation office did not recommend a non-custodial sentence.

The court also took into account the views of the victim’s family, noting that the deceased, a 32 year old Ugandan national, had been a key provider.

Her death left behind three young children now under the care of their grandmother in Uganda, with the family said to be deeply affected both emotionally and financially.

Justice Kimondo observed that while the accused was a first offender and had shown remorse, the level of violence used in the attack was a serious aggravating factor.

The judge noted that the use of a knife to inflict fatal injuries, coupled with the continued assault even as the victim attempted to flee, demonstrated a high degree of brutality.

“Manslaughter is a grave offence,” the court stated, adding that the sentence must reflect both the seriousness of the crime and the need for accountability.

The court therefore sentenced Namono to serve 10 years in prison.

The sentence will run from September 23, 2022, the date of her arrest, in line with the law.

The court further ordered that upon completion of her sentence, the accused, who was found to be an undocumented immigrant, be deported to Uganda.

By Andrew Kariuki

A fresh controversy has emerged over a prime parcel of public land in Nairobi, with fresh claims that it was irregularly transferred to a private entity before a multi-billion-shilling compensation claim was lodged against the government.

In a detailed press statement, concerned parties have raised alarm over what they describe as a deliberate attempt to convert public land into private ownership through manipulation of legal and administrative processes.

At the centre of the dispute is land originally known as Ukamba Province 964, whose lease expired in January 2001.

According to the statement, the land automatically reverted to the Government of Kenya upon expiry of the lease and was subsequently allocated to the Treasury in 2005, where it was held in trust for the public.

The land is now registered as Nairobi Block 37/63 within RM Block 37.

However, the matter took a dramatic turn after a court judgment delivered in 2012 reportedly favoured the Sheikh Fazal Ilahi Noordin Charitable Trust, effectively transferring ownership of the land to the private entity.

That judgment was later used in 2023 to formalize the transfer of the property.

The statement alleges that the judgment was obtained through misrepresentation and fraudulent documentation, claiming that the trust failed to present original lease documents when required for extension.

Instead, it is alleged that the trust sought court intervention and secured orders that facilitated the transfer of public land into private hands.

“This is not merely a land dispute. This is the attempted privatization of public property through procedural abuse,” the statement reads.

Concerns have also been raised about the role of public institutions in the matter, with claims that key state offices failed to defend public interest during the proceedings.

The statement points to officials in the Office of the Attorney General, including former office holders, accusing them of failing to take appropriate legal action to challenge the judgment or protect the land on behalf of the public.

Further controversy surrounds the compensation claim arising from the disputed land.

After securing title in 2023, the trust is said to have moved to the Land Tribunal seeking compensation exceeding Ksh 11 billion from the Kenya Urban Roads Authority (KURA) and the Kenya National Highways Authority (KeNHA) for land compulsorily acquired for the expansion of Thika Superhighway and its link roads.

The potential payout has sparked public concern, with critics warning that billions of shillings in taxpayer funds could be paid to a private entity over land whose ownership remains contested.
“Over 11 billion shillings of taxpayers’ money — money meant for schools, hospitals, roads and food security — is now at risk,” the statement warns.

The matter is further complicated by ongoing claims from other parties, including individuals asserting adverse possession rights and a private company, St. Benjamin Memorial Clinics Supplies Limited, all of whom are contesting ownership of the same parcel.

However, the statement emphasizes that under Kenyan law, public land cannot be acquired through adverse possession.

Observers say the case highlights a troubling pattern in land disputes, where public land is allegedly transferred to private entities before being subjected to compulsory acquisition, followed by substantial compensation claims.

The statement also raises serious constitutional concerns, questioning whether public institutions are adequately safeguarding public assets and whether taxpayer funds are being exposed to exploitation.

Among the issues raised are whether public land is being made available to private interests through manipulation, and whether constitutional offices are acting in the best interests of citizens.

The statement further alleges that attempts by members of the public to intervene in court proceedings were unsuccessful.

It claims that on February 23, 2026, individuals appeared in court seeking to present evidence that the lease had expired and that the land had reverted to the government, but their efforts were not entertained.

Additionally, the statement claims that formal complaints had previously been lodged with the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP), but no decisive public action has been taken.

The situation has drawn comparisons to past land scandals, with claims that the case mirrors earlier controversies where the government allegedly compensated private entities for land that originally belonged to the public.
In a further escalation, it is alleged that the trust has threatened to demolish a public footbridge constructed using taxpayer funds, raising fears of pressure tactics being employed in the dispute.

Those behind the statement are now calling for urgent action, including independent investigations, a forensic audit of documents used in the original case, suspension of any compensation proceedings, and legal steps to set aside any judgment found to have been obtained fraudulently.

They are also demanding accountability from public officials involved in the matter.

“This is not about personalities. This is about protecting what belongs to millions of Kenyans,” the statement concludes.

As the controversy unfolds, the case is expected to raise significant legal and constitutional questions about public land management, institutional accountability, and the safeguarding of public resources.