DCI fights CitiBank bid to halt Sh261million Kiru Tea Factory loan probe

The Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI) has asked the High Court to dismiss a petition by Citibank N.A Kenya seeking to stop investigations into a disputed Sh261million loan advanced to Kiru Tea Factory based in Murang’a and managed by the Kenya Tea Development Agency (KTDA).

The DCI has defended summons issued to Citibank Kenya Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Martin Mugambi, saying the bank and its CEO have failed to demonstrate that the investigations are malicious, unconstitutional or an abuse of the legal process.

In a response filed in court, Inspector Brian Musau said detectives are investigating allegations of conspiracy to defraud, falsification of records, illegal procurement of a bank loan, embezzlement of funds and fraudulent extension of a management agreement.

The investigation was launched following a complaint by Kiru Tea Factory chairman Geoffrey Chege Kirundi, who alleged that the Sh261 million facility was obtained by individuals who were not registered directors of the tea factory.

According to the DCI, the loan proceeds were subsequently misappropriated, prompting detectives to investigate how the facility was obtained and how the funds were utilised.

Musau told the court that the facility agreement was signed by Stephen Githiga, whom investigators established was not a registered director of Kiru Tea Factory and therefore lacked authority to bind the company.

The DCI further claims that the board resolution used to approve the loan was passed by individuals who were not listed as directors in the company’s CR-12 records.

Investigators argue that proper due diligence by Citibank would have revealed that the individuals presenting themselves as directors lacked the legal authority to obtain the loan on behalf of Kiru Tea Factory.

Musau said the complaint prompted the opening of an inquiry on June 11, 2024, after which detectives began tracing the movement of the loan proceeds.

As part of the inquiry, Mugambi was summoned to record a statement concerning the transactions.

The DCI maintains that the summons fell squarely within its statutory mandate to investigate complaints made in good faith.

The DCI stressed that its role is limited to conducting investigations, with the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions retaining the authority to determine whether suspects should ultimately be charged.

The DCI also accused Citibank of attempting to frustrate the investigation through what it described as frivolous court applications.

According to Musau, Kiru Tea Factory is owned by more than 8,000 tea farmers, raising concerns over the alleged diversion of funds belonging to the farmers.

He claimed that the disputed loan was eventually repaid using proceeds from tea sales—money that would otherwise have been available for payment of bonuses to the farmers.

The DCI said detectives also obtained court orders requiring Citibank to surrender critical documents relating to the facility.

These included the loan agreement, term sheet, corporate guarantee and transfer instructions, which investigators consider crucial to establishing how the loan was approved and disbursed.

Musau told the court that the bank failed to provide the documents despite the orders.

The DCI subsequently withdrew the summons issued to Mugambi following a meeting with Citibank representatives on June 15, 2026.

However, the DCI insists that the withdrawal did not terminate the wider investigation, which remains active.

The investigators have therefore urged the High Court to reject Citibank’s petition, arguing that stopping the probe at this stage would interfere with a lawful criminal investigation into allegations involving millions of shillings belonging to a tea factory owned by thousands of farmers.