A businessman and a researcher have dragged NCBA Bank Kenya and the Kenyan state into court, demanding Sh2 billion in damages after what they call five years of malicious prosecution that ended with their full acquittal.
Daniel Mwero and Dr Naomi Muinga filed the civil suit following their clearance by the courts in November 2025.
They claim the criminal case against them was pushed without proper basis, caused them lasting harm, and left them fighting for justice long after the charges collapsed.
They are seeking special damages of Sh2 billion together with general, aggravated and exemplary damages.
The pair say the prosecution dragged on for half a decade, tying up their time, resources and reputations. Mwero, a businessman, and Muinga, a researcher, argue that the process was not only prolonged but driven by malice.
They have named both the bank and the state as defendants, placing NCBA at the centre of the claim for allegedly playing a role in setting the legal machinery in motion against them.
This is not a small claim. Sh2 billion is a substantial sum that puts the bank’s handling of the matter under a harsh spotlight. Banks are expected to act with care when dealing with customers or related parties.
When a criminal case that lasts five years ends in acquittal, questions naturally arise about whether the institution properly assessed the facts before the matter reached the courts.
NCBA has faced other legal and operational pressures in recent years, including cases involving internal controls and customer complaints.
This latest suit adds to the scrutiny. The bank has not yet publicly detailed its response to the new claim, but the filing alone forces attention onto how it manages disputes that turn criminal.
For Mwero and Muinga, the five-year ordeal is over in the criminal courts, yet the civil fight has only begun. They maintain that the prosecution was without reasonable cause and that the bank and the state should now answer for the damage done.
The case will test whether the evidence supports their allegations of malice and whether the scale of damages they seek is justified.
NCBA finds itself defending not only its role in the original case but also its approach to conflict with customers and partners.
A bank of its size and standing cannot afford prolonged questions about fairness in its dealings.
The Sh2 billion claim makes clear that Mwero and Muinga believe the price of those five years should be paid in full.
Add Comment