Basi v Directorate of Criminal Investigation & 2 others; Basi (Interested Party) (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Case E009 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 5562 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A landowner challenging a DCI-backed restriction on his Transmara title lost because he skipped the statutory procedure under the Land Registration Act before going to court.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the application under Section 78(2) of the Land Registration Act was merited despite the prior judgment in Kilgoris ELC No. 36/2021
Although the Applicant raised an arguable point that the DCI-imposed restriction undermined a prior court determination, the court declined jurisdiction because the Applicant had not exhausted the statutory mechanism under Sections 73 and 78(1) of the Land Registration Act. The application was struck out without considering the merits, and removal of the restriction was left to await the outcome of the pending Petition No. E007/2024.
The court observed that the subject matter of the application was the same as in the concluded ELC No. 36/2021 and the pending Land Petition No. E007/2024. It held that a dissatisfied party should appeal rather than lodge a criminal complaint, but that the Applicant, in turn, was required to first exhaust the alternative dispute-resolution procedure under Sections 73 and 78(1) of the Land Registration Act before invoking Section 78(2).
Whether the 1st Respondent had power to instruct the Land Registrar to place a restriction on the suit property
The court found arguability and merit in the contention that the DCI had no mandate to instruct the Registrar to register the restriction, but declined to decide the point on the merits due to non-exhaustion.
The court noted that the Applicant's affidavit raised an arguable claim that the restriction contradicted the judgment in ELC No. 36/2021, and that the 1st Respondent had 'no mandate whatsoever' to instruct the Registrar. Nevertheless, since the statutory exhaustion requirement had not been met, the court did not pronounce itself on the merits.
Legal principles established
#- A party dissatisfied with a court's determination must prefer an appeal rather than lodge a complaint with the DCI, since ownership and occupation of land are for the ELC to determine.
- The statutory procedures under Sections 73 and 78(1) of the Land Registration Act must be exhausted before applying to court under Section 78(2).
Court orders
#- 1.The Application dated 12th November 2024 is struck out
- 2.The removal of the restriction shall abide by the outcome of Petition No. E007/2024
- 3.Paragraph 8 of the Replying Affidavit of Inspector Kennedy Mulei Ndeto (scandalous allegations that the judgment in Kilgoris ELC No. 36/2021 was predetermined) is expunged from record
- 4.Costs to the Respondents
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 1A, 1B, 3, 3A and 63(e) of the Civil Procedure Act; Section 78(2) of the Land Registration Act; Order 51(1) and (3) of the Civil Procedure Rules
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Basi v Directorate of Criminal Investigation & 2 others; Basi (Interested Party) (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Case E009 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 5562 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Kilgoris ELC Case (Notice of Motion dated 12th November 2024). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/5562/eng@2025-07-28
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.