Court Declares Rwandese Tech Guru Is Rightful Owner Of KSh 400M Business Claimed By Kenyan Man

• Kirimi Koome is accused of defrauding Rwandese investor Muhinyuza of KSh 400 million that was wired to the accounts of Stay Online, an online trading firm
• Muhinyuza, an IT professional, told the court that he trusted Koome after being introduced to him and that he comes from a wealthy family
• In his brief ruling, Justice Alfred Mabeya described Kirimi Koome as an evasive individual who committed fraud by not filling out ownership documents properly

Dennis Lubanga, a Kenyan journalist at TUKO.co.ke, brings more than 10 years of experience covering politics, news, and feature stories across digital and print media in Kenya.

Nairobi - A high court judge has ruled that a Rwandese tech guru who approached a Kenyan businessman to help him register an online company is the rightful owner of the start-up that has been at the centre of a vicious legal battle.

In this case, businessman Kirimi Koome is accused of defrauding Rwandese investor Muhinyuza of KSh 400 million that was wired to the accounts of Stay Online, an online trading firm.

Muhinyuza, an IT professional, told the court that he trusted Koome after being introduced to him, that he comes from a wealthy family, and that he would connect him with prominent people.

What Justice Alfred Mabeya said about Kirimi Koome

In his brief ruling, Justice Alfred Mabeya described Koome as an evasive individual who committed fraud by not filling out ownership documents properly.

"Accordingly, I find and hold that the first plaintiff is the beneficial owner of the company. I find that the first defendant committed fraud by not filling out the beneficial owner form properly," Mabeya ruled.

The judge further described Koome as an evasive individual who did not give convincing answers when he was giving his testimony during the trial hearing.

"I should categorically state here that, when he testified before me, the first defendant turned out to be evasive and unwilling to answer simple questions put to him. He would prevaricate and give answers that were completely unrelated to the questions put to him. That was unlike Plw1, who came out as easy-going and honest in his answers, even under intense cross-examination by Mr. Omwanza, who learned counsel for the first defendant and interested party," the judge observed.

Muhinyuza and Koome have been locked in an intense court brawl that pitted lawyer Danstan Omari against Cliff Ombeta, who was representing the Kenyan businessman.

The youthful Koome was arrested on October 1, 2023, at an Airbnb after the Director of Public Prosecutions asked for a warrant of arrest.

According to Muhiyunza, he was linked to Koome by a friend in the banking sector when he wanted to set up his business in Kenya.

The Rwandese national claims that he used Koome to register the company on his behalf, as he had not regularised his business permit in Kenya.

According to the evidence presented in court, Koome was supposed to earn commissions and act as an agent.

Muhinyuza claimed the over KSh 300 million was to be used to operationalise the business dubbed Kenyan Stay Online Limited, which would allow Kenyans to earn income by selling their products online and from the comfort of their homes, besides creating thousands of job opportunities.

When did Kirimi Koome allegedly commit the offence

Koome is alleged to have committed the offence on diverse dates between July 10 and October 4, 2023, in Nairobi jointly with others, not before the court, and with intent to defraud.

Koome is also accused of stealing KSh 14,945,000 (USD 100,000) in Stay Online Limited property that was entrusted to him to pay provisional taxes for the company.

He is also charged with making a false entry in a document for a payment of USD 100,000 (KSh 14 million) to his Equity Bank USD account and providing false documents.

After the ruling, Muhinyuza's advocate hailed the ruling, saying the court had restored the confidence of foreign investors.

How long was the case going to last

Earlier, TUKO.co.ke reported that the prosecution said the hearing in the case would take approximately 14 days.

The prosecution said the documentary evidence being relied on in the matter is weighty, and they foresee the complainant and other witnesses taking more than a day to testify in the case.

The matter had been scheduled for a hearing on Friday, November 24, but failed to kick off as Desire could not make it to court due to unavoidable circumstances.