Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
MagistrateOtherCriminal Case (conspiracy to traffic narcotic drugs, charge under Section 4B(4) as read with Section 4B(5) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Control) Act, No. 4 of 1994) - number not stated in judgment· [2025] KEMC 313 (KLR)

Republic v Malika (Criminal Case E001 of 2024) [2025] KEMC 313 (KLR)

JKIA Law Courts (Magistrates' Court)
23 May 2025
NTNjeri Thuku
5,988 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~24 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan court convicted a woman of drug trafficking conspiracy based mainly on phone messages, travel documents and M-Pesa records—no drugs ever touched her hands.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
This was a first-instance criminal trial before the JKIA Law Courts, described by the court as the first of its kind following the 2022 amendments to the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Control) Act. Catherine Eshituku Malika was charged with conspiracy to traffic 750 grams of cocaine valued at Kshs 3,000,000, allegedly to be exported to Mahe Island, Seychelles on October 25, 2023. The prosecution called eleven witnesses, including the taxi driver who ferried Stella Wangari Wairimu to JKIA, immigration officers who intercepted Catherine at Moyale while she attempted to leave Kenya, a forensic examiner who extracted WhatsApp conversations and travel itineraries from her phone, and the investigating officer. Stella had been arrested in Seychelles with 36 pellets of cocaine in her stomach following a memo from Seychelles authorities. The defence was that Catherine and Stella were friends and fellow sex workers, that Catherine only paid for a taxi as a favour, and that drug references in her chats were misunderstood. The court framed a single point for determination: whether Catherine committed conspiracy to traffic drugs under section 4B. Applying the burden and standard of proof under Article 50(2)(a), the court found the circumstantial digital evidence - Stella's travel itineraries on Catherine's phone, the M-Pesa transfers, and the messages with Cris - established the conspiracy beyond reasonable doubt. Notably, the court also publicised Catherine's M-Pesa transactions with Margaret Nduta Macharia, whose fate is unknown. The court convicted Catherine on May 23, 2025; sentencing was not part of this judgment.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the prosecution proved conspiracy to traffic narcotics beyond reasonable doubt

Holding

The court found the charge proved, relying on the two sets of travel itineraries found in Catherine's phone, the M-Pesa transfers between her and Stella, and her messages with Cris referencing Stella and 'cok'

Reasoning

The forensic extraction of Catherine's phone showed her possession of Stella's travel itineraries to India and Seychelles, mirroring the e-ticket produced by the investigating officer. M-Pesa transactions showed substantial transfers to Stella around the travel dates. Her WhatsApp exchanges with Cris, in which she offered to help locate Stella who was 'destroying things for everyone', connected her to persons concerned with the drugs. Drug traffickers, per the investigating officer, use coded language such as 'cok'. The cumulative circumstantial evidence excluded the innocent explanation of a caring friend.

p. 10
02

Presumption of innocence and burden/standard of proof

Holding

The burden lay on the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, per Article 50(2)(a) of the Constitution

Reasoning

The court framed the sole point for determination as whether Catherine committed the offence of conspiracy to traffic drugs contrary to section 4(B). It reaffirmed the constitutional presumption of innocence and that the prosecution must discharge its burden, then assessed the circumstantial and digital evidence against that standard and found it sufficient.

p. 7

Legal principles established

#
  • The burden of proving a criminal case rests on the prosecution and the standard is proof beyond reasonable doubt, anchored in the presumption of innocence under Article 50(2)(a) of the Constitution
  • Elements of criminal conspiracy as advanced by the defence

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Finding of guilty of conspiracy to traffic contrary to section 4(B)4 as read together with section 4(B)5 of the Narcotic and Psychotropic Substances Control Act
  2. 2.Conviction of the accused

Authorities

#

Legislation

  • Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Control) ActSection 4B(4) as read with Section 4B(5)
  • Constitution of KenyaArticle 50(2)(a)
  • Criminal Procedure CodeSection 210
  • Evidence ActSection 65(8) as read with section 106
Jurisdiction invoked
First-instance criminal trial under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Control) Act, No. 4 of 1994; no constitutional/statutory jurisdictional provision expressly invoked

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Republic v Malika (Criminal Case E001 of 2024) [2025] KEMC 313 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Criminal Case (conspiracy to traffic narcotic drugs, charge under Section 4B(4) as read with Section 4B(5) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Control) Act, No. 4 of 1994) - number not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kemc/2025/313/eng@2025-05-23

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.