Court upholds 20-year sentence for man claiming to be late Governor Gachagua's son
Crime and Justice
By
Nancy Gitonga
| Jun 17, 2026
Jackson Kihara Gachucha, nephew of former DP Rigathi Gachagua, at the Milimani Law Courts, June 17, 2026. [David Gichuru, Standard]
The High Court has dismissed an application by a man claiming to be the son of the late Nyeri Governor Nderitu Gachagua seeking a review of his 20-year jail sentence for robbery with violence, terming the application an abuse of the court process.
In a ruling delivered on Wednesday at the Milimani High Court, Justice Alexander Muteti found that Jackson Kihara had failed to demonstrate any illegality, impropriety or irregularity that would warrant interference with the sentence imposed by the trial court.
Justice Muteti held that while the High Court had jurisdiction to consider the application, Kihara had not presented any legal basis to justify a review of the sentence.
READ MORE
Graduates to get access to start-up capital under new programme
Engineers challenged on road designs
Ride out of poverty: How a widow built wealth through boda boda business
Security and liberalised skies key to growth of aviation sector in Africa
Why KRA has changed tack in revenue collections
Budget reality check: Moody's warns Kenya of fiscal pain ahead
Not for beginners: Why new market entrants quit easily
How to use digital platforms without losing business identity
"This court finds that there was no impropriety or irregularity to warrant the review of the sentence in this matter," ruled Justice Muteti.
The judge noted that the offence of robbery with violence attracts a maximum sentence under the law and that the trial court had properly exercised its discretion in sentencing Kihara.
The court observed that Kihara's mitigation, lack of previous criminal record and a favourable pre-sentence report dated April 2, 2020, had already been considered by the sentencing court before the 20-year jail term was imposed.
Justice Muteti further noted that the sentence was ordered to run from the date Kihara was remanded in custody on May 29, 2020, in compliance with Section 333(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
"The sentence complied with the provisions of Section 333(2) and the trial court properly considered the period spent in custody," the judge stated.
The court also rejected attempts by Kihara to revisit issues relating to an alleged family dispute and inheritance wrangles involving members of the Gachagua family.
During previous proceedings, Kihara had sensationally claimed that former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua orchestrated his prosecution in a scheme to wrest control of a multi-million-shilling family estate.
He had alleged that he was framed in the robbery case after refusing to surrender documents entrusted to him by his late father concerning family property.
However, Justice Muteti declined to entertain the allegations, saying the issues had no bearing on the sentence review application before the court.
"The robbery charges he was convicted of were determined by the trial court. The issues relating to family and property disputes are irrelevant to the determination of this application," the judge ruled.
The court observed that Kihara had knowledge of the matters he was now raising during the trial and could have presented them before the trial court.
"The applicant was charged in April 2019, and all the details he is raising now were in his possession at that time. Claims regarding his father's death and family disputes ought to have been raised during the trial," Justice Muteti said.
The judge added that no issues had been raised demonstrating any improper conduct in the criminal proceedings and accused Kihara of attempting to draw sympathy from the court.
"All the issues raised now are intended to draw sympathy from this court. The court cannot allow parties to continuously return before it with irrelevant issues that have no legal basis," he said.
Justice Muteti concluded that both the High Court and the Court of Appeal had already considered matters arising from the conviction and sentence.
"The instant application has no legal foundation and discloses no cause of action. This court finds that the application is an abuse of the court process," the judge ruled.
He consequently dismissed the application for lack of merit, effectively upholding Kihara's 20-year prison sentence.