Justice Nabil Orina of the High Court rejected ABC Bank’s application to stop the Directorate of Criminal Investigations from continuing a criminal probe into a disputed KSh200 million loan and the bank’s planned sale of two Nairobi properties used as security.
The dispute stems from a loan offered to Aima Enterprises in March 2012, where ABC Bank provided a KSh30 million overdraft and post-import finance of up to $2 million, capped at KSh170 million, and registered a charge over the two properties on November 16, 2012 before the borrower defaulted.
ABC Bank says Aima defaulted, issued statutory notices and scheduled an auction of the properties for February 13, 2025 to recover the debt, while borrower Mohammed Aden Barre claims he and his wife never signed the loan documents.
Barre lodged a police complaint on August 27, 2024, prompting the DCI’s Banking Fraud Investigation Unit to obtain banking and land records, record statements and commission a forensic examination, which a report dated September 17, 2025 concluded that Barre and his wife had not signed the documents.
The bank disputes the forensic finding, asserting that Barre personally visited its premises to execute the security papers and citing a visitor register and payments made to him by Aima Enterprises around November 2012 as evidence.
Justice Orina noted that investigators should assess the evidence but declined to decide whose account was correct, stating “The forensic report, as described in the record, provides an identifiable basis for investigating the authenticity of the disputed documents,” and added that the report did not establish that the bank committed an offence.
The bank also relied on a January 2017 magistrate’s court order that it said barred investigators from harassing the bank, but the judge held that the earlier order remained relevant only within its wording and context and found no breach by the current investigation.
Citing civil cases where Barre challenged the charge or sought to stop the sale, the bank noted that a commercial suit was struck out for lack of jurisdiction on January 27, 2025 and an appeal remained pending, and it argued that the renewed investigation was intended to pressure the bank to abandon its position in the appeal, pointing to debts owed by Barre of KSh4 million under a magistrate’s court decree and KSh36 million under a High Court judgment.
The DCI and the Director of Public Prosecutions said civil proceedings did not preclude investigations into suspected offences, with the DCI forwarding the file to the DPP, which requested further inquiries on January 30, 2026, and no decision to charge the bank had been made.
Concluding the hearing, Justice Orina ruled that investigations could proceed alongside civil cases but must not be used to exert improper pressure, and said “The court finds no sufficient basis for granting the declarations, certiorari or prohibition.”
