Milimani Court: Elijah Wachira SHA Case Withdrawal Approved in Kenya

• Charges against former Social Health Authority boss Elijah Wachira and co-accused Robert Ingarisa in a Sh17.5 million misappropriation case were withdrawn by the Milimani Law Courts.
• The withdrawal, granted on October 6, 2026, under Section 87(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code, also included the release of their cash bail.
• Wachira's legal team, Manyonge Wanyama & Associates LLP, successfully argued to the DPP that some alleged transactions occurred after his departure from the Social Health Authority.
• The defense cited Article 157(6)(c) of the Constitution and the 2019 Guidelines on the Decision to Charge in their request for a review of the charges.
• The case against other co-accused, including Arthur Otula and Rosemary Daraja, remains active and was not terminated by this withdrawal.

The successful application of Section 87(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code and Article 157(6)(c) of the Constitution underscores the critical role of diligent legal representation in challenging prosecutorial decisions.

The Milimani Law Courts in Nairobi recently approved the withdrawal of a significant misappropriation case involving Sh17.5 million against Elijah Wachira, the former head of the Social Health Authority (SHA), and his co-accused, Robert Ingarisa. Principal Magistrate Daisy Mutai issued the order on October 6, 2026, facilitating the cessation of charges under the provisions of Section 87(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code. This decision also mandated the immediate return of the cash bail that had been deposited by both individuals to their respective depositors.

Wachira and Ingarisa had faced accusations of jointly misusing Sh17,591,473, funds purportedly belonging to the Social Health Authority. The alleged financial impropriety occurred on various dates between October 2024 and May 20, 2025, within the authority's headquarters located in Nairobi. These charges were formally brought under Section 48(2) of the Social Health Insurance Act, as documented in Nairobi Magistrates Court Criminal Case No. E559 of 2025. It is important to note that this specific legal action also encompasses other individuals, including Arthur Otula and Rosemary Daraja, who are confronting various criminal allegations.

The withdrawal of the charges against Elijah Wachira and Robert Ingarisa stemmed directly from a proactive application made by Wachira's legal representatives to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP). The law firm, Manyonge Wanyama & Associates LLP, formally requested a comprehensive review of the initial decision to charge their client. Their core argument, presented in a detailed letter to the DPP, highlighted a critical timeline discrepancy: Wachira had officially departed from the Social Health Authority on November 12, 2024.

The defense team meticulously pointed out that several of the transactions enumerated in the charge sheet were alleged to have taken place subsequent to Wachira's departure from the SHA. Furthermore, the lawyers undertook an extensive review of 2,235 pages of documents provided by the investigating officer, asserting that this voluminous evidence contained no adverse mention of their client. Citing Article 157(6)(c) of the Constitution and the 2019 Guidelines on the Decision to Charge, Manyonge Wanyama & Associates LLP contended that Wachira could not be held criminally liable for financial activities that purportedly occurred after he ceased to be an employee of the authority.

The court's decision to withdraw the charges, explicitly recorded in its October 6 orders, underscores the significant role of Section 87(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code in the Kenyan legal system. This section permits the prosecution to withdraw a case with the court's consent, often when new facts emerge or the evidentiary basis is re-evaluated. The successful application of this provision, coupled with the constitutional mandate under Article 157(6)(c) which empowers the DPP to review and alter charging decisions, illustrates a crucial mechanism for ensuring justice and preventing unwarranted prosecutions.

While the charges against Elijah Wachira and Robert Ingarisa have been dropped, and their cash bail released, this development does not signify the termination of the entire case. Proceedings against the remaining accused persons, including Arthur Otula and Rosemary Daraja, are expected to continue. The court's order specifically clarified that it did not make any determination regarding the allegations against these other individuals, indicating that their legal battles are ongoing and subject to further judicial directives. The successful application of Section 87(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code and Article 157(6)(c) of the Constitution underscores the critical role of diligent legal representation in challenging prosecutorial decisions.

Defense lawyers in Kenya should note the successful application of Section 87(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code and Article 157(6)(c) of the Constitution to secure the withdrawal of charges, particularly when challenging the timeline or evidentiary basis of the prosecution's case. This case provides a precedent for seeking DPP review based on new facts or procedural issues, highlighting the importance of diligent legal representation in scrutinizing prosecution evidence.

Source: Original reporting via Kenyan news sources