Human Rights Advocate Raises Questions Over Arrests, Bail and Police Investigations in Eldoret
Among the cases highlighted by Kirui is that of Bonface Kipchumba Biwott, whose arrest and subsequent prosecution are documented in the materials reviewed by Hubzmedia.
Human rights activist Kimutai Kirui.File Photo
By Hubzmedia
A human rights advocate has called for an independent review of several alleged incidents involving arrests, detention, cash bail and the handling of criminal investigations at Eldoret Central Police Station, raising concerns over accountability and adherence to due process.
Kimutai Kirui, who has been involved in following up on complaints by individuals who say they have encountered difficulties while in police custody, said the allegations should not be treated as established facts but deserve scrutiny by the relevant oversight agencies.
Kirui said the concerns include alleged irregularities in the recording of arrests, demands for money in connection with the release of suspects, discrepancies in cash-bail records and questions over how evidence is handled during investigations.
“These are serious allegations that require independent verification. The records should speak—the Occurrence Books, cash-bail registers, charge sheets, court documents, mobile-money records and other evidence,” Kirui said.
He called on the National Police Service and the Independent Policing Oversight Authority (IPOA) to independently examine the complaints and establish whether any officers may have breached the law or established police procedures.
Questions Over Biwott’s Arrest and Bail
Among the cases highlighted by Kirui is that of Bonface Kipchumba Biwott, whose arrest and subsequent prosecution are documented in the materials reviewed by Hubzmedia.
According to Biwott’s account, he was arrested on July 22, 2026, and taken to Eldoret Central Police Station. He alleges that he spent several hours in custody before being formally booked.
Biwott further alleges that money was sought in connection with his release and that a discrepancy arose between the amount he says was paid and the amount reflected on the cash-bail documentation.
A charge sheet contained in the court documents, however, records that Biwott was released on cash bail of Sh30,000 in relation to a robbery-with-violence charge.
Kirui said the discrepancy should be subjected to documentary verification rather than being settled through competing accounts.
“If there is a difference between what a complainant says was paid and what appears in an official cash-bail record, then the appropriate authorities should examine the records and establish what actually happened,” he said.
Court Records Raise Questions Over Earlier Firearm Case
The concerns also touch on an earlier criminal case involving Biwott and Kelvin Mwangi Kirutha, who were charged with robbery with violence, possession of a firearm without a licence and possession of ammunition without a licence.
The charge sheet indicates that the two were accused in connection with an alleged robbery and the possession of a Glock pistol and ammunition.
However, the Eldoret Magistrate’s Court subsequently acquitted both accused persons after finding that the prosecution had not proved the charges beyond reasonable doubt.
In its judgment, the court noted discrepancies in the particulars of the firearm, including differences between the serial number stated in the charge and the serial number referred to in testimony. The court also noted that the firearm and other exhibits were not produced before it for verification.
The judgment further states that the investigating officer did not testify and that no exhibits were produced during the trial. The court ultimately dismissed the charges and acquitted both accused persons under Section 215 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Kirui said the judgment should form part of any broader assessment of how the investigation was conducted.
“An acquittal does not necessarily mean that every allegation surrounding an investigation was false, but it does require us to look carefully at what evidence was presented, what evidence was missing and whether investigative procedures were properly followed,” he said.
Call for Independent Verification
Kirui has also raised questions about alleged subsequent police actions involving individuals connected to the earlier case, including allegations concerning mobile-money transactions and the identification of suspects.
According to the allegations presented to Hubzmedia, questions have been raised over whether investigators established the ownership or control of particular mobile numbers and handsets before linking individuals to transactions.
Kirui stressed that such allegations must be tested against forensic and documentary evidence.
“A mobile-money transaction by itself does not necessarily establish who was physically controlling a particular handset at a particular time. Investigators must establish that link through admissible evidence,” he said.
He said the same principle should apply to all suspects regardless of their social or economic status.
Demand for Accountability
The human rights advocate said the concerns are ultimately about the integrity of Kenya’s criminal justice system and the need to ensure that police powers are exercised within the law.
“This is not about asking anyone to be convicted without due process. It is about demanding the truth. If the allegations are false, an independent investigation should clear those affected. If they are true, those responsible should face the law,” Kirui said.
He urged the Inspector General of Police and IPOA to examine the complaints, including the circumstances surrounding arrests, custody records, cash-bail procedures and the handling of exhibits and investigative evidence.
Kirui said accountability should extend to both complainants and police officers.
“Police officers have a difficult responsibility of protecting the public and enforcing the law. But that authority must always operate within the Constitution and established procedures. Where there are credible allegations of misconduct, they must be independently investigated.”
The Evidence Must Speak
The allegations raised by Kirui and the complainants have not been independently established by Hubzmedia, and the named officers and police authorities have not been presented in the material reviewed as having responded to each of the allegations.
The court judgment, however, provides independently recorded findings in the earlier criminal case, including the acquittal of Biwott and Kirutha after the court found that the prosecution had failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt.
Kirui maintains that an independent examination of the complaints would provide an opportunity for all parties to establish the facts.
“The Occurrence Books should speak. The cash-bail registers should speak. The charge sheets should speak. The court judgments should speak. The mobile-money records and forensic evidence should speak. That is how we establish the truth,” he said.
Hubzmedia will continue seeking responses from the relevant police authorities and oversight agencies as part of efforts to establish the facts surrounding the allegations.
About Author
