Error: Contact form not found.

A court battle that could ultimately decide the ownership of Coast Calcium Limited in Kwale county has turned out to be a nightmare to the Director of Public Prosecution and the National Police Service who have all given conflicting statements before the Mombasa Law courts.

The bone of contention is a case of an alleged forged signature of one of the directors named Ahmed Ahmed Mohamed who was accused of giving false information by the Director of Public Prosecution (DPP) acting on behalf of six other directors.

Ahmed is battling the six other directors namely Mohamed K.Ahmed,Abdulgano Ahmed,Yusuf A.N,Abdulatif A.N all as shareholders with Issak A.N and Siddik A.N as mere shareholders.

The six claim that Ahmed sold his 150 shares at Ksh8 million but he insists that the transfer of deed documents were forged.

Ahmed acquired the plant in 2007 from European investors who opted out of the country just before the post-election violence.

He later brought in the six as directors considering they were his childhood friends to the extent that in 2008, he gave them the autonomy to run the business as he focused on his other investments.

They however claim that he made a decision to sell his shares back in 2014 and want the court to rule that he relinquishes the shares in question as per the disputed deed of transfer.

In the case before the Mombasa Law Courts, Ahmed is accused of giving false information to a person employed in the public service contrary to section 129(a) of the penal code.

This is after Ahmed complained to the Director of Criminal Investigations (DCI) that his signature had been forged in a scheme to take the company from him.

The case filed by the DPP states that on 7th April, 2020, at the DCI Urban office Mombasa, Ahmed complained that his 150 shares at Coast Calcium Limited, had been fraudulently transferred to another director, Mohamed Kassam Ahmed, through forged deed of transfer.

The DPP further explains that Chief inspector Bernard Cheruiyot, a document examiner at DCI Headquarters National Forensic Lab testified that on 14th April 2021, he received four documents, including a questioned transfer deed (marked Q) dated 24th October 2014.

Interestingly,Mr. Cheruiyot concluded that signature was done by Ahmed and that his claims of ossible forgery were not real.

The DPP also stated that Elijah Kemboi,an officer stationed at Central Police Station testified that on 8th October 2020,stating that Ahmed reported that someone stole his KRA pin to transfer property.The report was recorded and forwarded to the crime office.

Moses Mwaniki who is an officer at DCI Mombasa in 2020 testified that on 7th April 2020,Ahmed reported that his signature was forged on a share transfer deed. This ended up at the DCI Complaints Unit.

Sanjeev Khagram – a partner at B Patel and Patel Advocates confirmed witnessing Mohamed Kassim Ahmed signature on the transfer deed and attesting it with his signature and stamp.

Mohamed Kassim Ahmed who is claiming Ahmed’s shares in his testimony said Ahmed held 150 shares but lost interest in the company intending to return to Canada.

Mr. Kassim claims that Ahmed agreed to sell him the shares at Ksh 8 million and that the transfer of deed was prepared by the company secretary,signed by Ahmed and attested by lawyer Sanjeev Khagram.

Mr. Kassim claims that money sent to B Patel and Patels account remains uncollectedand that Ahmed’s claims of forgery are unrealistic.

Senior Sergent Charles Kyalo Kitusa the investigating officer from DCI Headquarters Public Complaints Unit confirmed that the transfer deed was witnessed by two advocates and that upon verification, Ahmed’s signature was confirmed to be genuine.

 

Ahmed’s defense

In his defense, Ahmed gave a sworn statement denying the charge and insisted that he never sold shares, further accusing a AB Patel and Patel and Mohamed Kassam Ahmed of colluding to steal them.

He stated that he gave he gave the other directors free shares and questioned why he would sell his shares for Kshs. 8 million.

The court initially had made a decision that under cross examination,Ahmed’s testimony was inconsistent.

“He claimed to have bought Coast Calcium Limited with nothing,later revising this to Kshs.500,000,000 but provided no evidence. He confirmed recording a statement admitting to signing the transfer but alleged trickery by Mohammed Kassam Ahmed,”

The court at this point was satisfied that Ahmed gave false information.

The case took a major turn when the Director of Public Prosecution (DPP) applied to withdraw the matter under section 87(a) of the criminal Procedure Code based on a letter dated 15th July 2024 which stated that it is unsafe to proceed with the case due to two conflicting forensic reports concerning the disputed signature of Ahmed.

Kassam through his lawyer Mr.Magolo challenged the DPPs application to which the court agreed and ruled that the case proceeds to the end.

The conflicting report was brought in by Mr.John Muinde,who took over the matter after Ahmed sought help from senior officials at the DCI Headquarters, claiming that the other officers who handled the matter had been compromised.

Mr.Muinde in his statement identifies himself as a the head of forensic document examination section and boasts of 18 years experience with the Kenya Police Forensic Department on a full-time basis.

He concluded that Ahmed’s signature on the deed was forged.

” I have examined and compared the disputed signatures pointed by arrows in red ink page 7 on the exhibit marked “Q” with the specimen signatures of Ahmed Ahmed Mohamed on the exhibits marked “S1-S3” and the known signature pointed by arrows in black ink on “B” page 31,” he stated.

It further states: “In my opinion the signatures have not been made by the same author. The questioned signatures are different in style of execution and form,”

A lawyer who has been following up on the case has opined that the case is a reflection of the rot at the DCI and within the judiciary.

“ Once the DPP seeks to withdraw the case over conflicting forensic reports from the DCI that is a major breaking point but in the end,the officer who gave wrong findings must face the full force of law.

Ahmed on his part has lamented that some of the lawyers he initially trusted were compromised but remains confident that justice will be served.