Tayabali & another v Attorney General & 3 others (Petition E003 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 4822 (KLR) (17 April 2026) (Ruling)

Tayabali & another v Attorney General & 3 others (Petition E003 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 4822 (KLR) (17 April 2026) (Ruling)

The respondents have concluded investigations and forwarded the file to the Director of Public Prosecutions, who alone has discretion to prosecute. The respondents cannot be restrained from arresting or charging the petitioners as prosecution decisions are not within their control. The application lacks merit and is dismissed.

Citation
[2026] KEHC 4822 (KLR)
Parties
Petitioner: Noman Adamali Tayabali; Petitioner: Burhanuddin Noman Adamali; Respondent: Attorney General; Respondent: Inspector General of Police; Respondent: DCIO Mombasa Urban; Interested Party: Metsec Cables Limited
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
17 April 2026
Case Number
Petition E003 of 2025
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Application for Conservatory Order
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Conservatory Orders, Police Powers, Debt Recovery, Prosecution Discretion
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Criminal Law Civil Procedure Conservatory Orders Police Powers Debt Recovery Prosecution Discretion

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Noman Adamali Tayabali

Petitioner

Burhanuddin Noman Adamali

Petitioner

Attorney General

Respondent

Inspector General of Police

Respondent

DCIO Mombasa Urban

Respondent

Metsec Cables Limited

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Application for Conservatory Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should grant a conservatory order prohibiting arrest, charging, or interference with petitioners over unpaid debts pending the petition
  2. 2 Whether police involvement in debt recovery violates constitutional rights

Ratio Decidendi

The respondents have concluded investigations and forwarded the file to the Director of Public Prosecutions, who alone has discretion to prosecute. The respondents cannot be restrained from arresting or charging the petitioners as prosecution decisions are not within their control. The application lacks merit and is dismissed.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • No conservatory order issued
  • No order as to costs