Businessman Brian Reeves has suffered another legal setback after the High Court dismissed his petition challenging his arrest, investigations and prosecution, ruling that he had failed to prove that the case against him was malicious or unlawful.
Reeves had also sought Sh100 million in compensation, claiming that his rights were violated during his arrest, investigations and subsequent prosecution.
In a judgment delivered on August 20, 2026, Justice Lawrence Mugambi said Reeves had not demonstrated that the prosecution was initiated without reasonable or just cause or that it was tainted by illegality or procedural impropriety.
“In the circumstances, this Court finds that this Petition is devoid of merit and is hereby dismissed with costs to the respondents and the interested parties,” Justice Mugambi ruled.
Reeves had challenged the manner in which police investigated and prosecuted him, including his arrest and the search of his home at about 2 am.
He also complained that police compelled him to provide passwords to his mobile phones and computers. He further claimed that his photograph was shared on X by one of the respondents, warning members of the public about the alleged dangers he posed.
However, Justice Mugambi found that Reeves had not established bad faith or abuse of office by the investigating authorities or the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP).
The court noted that police acted on a complaint lodged against Reeves and that interviews with witnesses led investigators to gather additional material during their inquiry.
The DPP, the judge said, independently reviewed the evidence presented by investigators and formed the view that there was sufficient evidence to sustain the prosecution.
Justice Mugambi also declined to determine issues relating to the criminal case, noting that the ongoing proceedings before the magistrate’s court were the appropriate forum for addressing those matters.
On items allegedly confiscated from Reeves during the investigations, the judge noted that the issue had already been raised before the lower court.
The Kibera magistrate’s court had, on February 6, 2025, directed that the items be returned to Reeves. The judge said Reeves could therefore enforce the existing order instead of seeking fresh relief from the High Court.
Justice Mugambi also struck out a second interested party from the petition, saying Reeves had not demonstrated why the party was necessary or sought any relief against it.
The judge said courts should be slow to interfere with the constitutional mandate of the DPP where there is no clear evidence of abuse of office.
The court consequently dismissed the petition with costs, denying Reeves the Sh100 million compensation he had sought.
