Nairobi court has denied bail to Francis Kamau Karanja, who is charged with cyber harassment over a message allegedly sent to a magistrate at the Milimani Law Courts.

The court declined to release Karanja, citing concerns over possible interference with witnesses and the need to protect the alleged victim.

Karanja has denied the charge under Section 27(1)(a), read together with Section 27(2), of the Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes Act.

Details of the Alleged Cyber Harassment

According to the charge sheet, Karanja allegedly sent a message on September 28, 2026, to a phone number registered in the name of Magistrate Margaret Murage.

The prosecution alleges that the message referred to the handling of a case involving Gabriel Saka and contained words likely to cause fear or apprehension of violence against the judicial officer.

The State told the court that the alleged message had caused Murage to fear for her safety, forcing her to avoid using her residence and vehicle.

Opposing bail, prosecutors argued that the case required special consideration because the complainant is a judicial officer. They urged the court to consider the Judiciary Bail and Bond Policy Guidelines, particularly provisions relating to witness interference and the safety of the alleged victim.

Defence Asks Court to Grant Bail

Karanja's lawyer, Muriithi Mbaabu, urged the court to release his client on reasonable bail terms.

The defence argued that Karanja had been denied police bail without being given reasons for the decision.

Court proceedings indicate that Karanja was initially taken to Kilimani Police Station on Tuesday but was not presented in court that day.

He was subsequently brought before the Kibera Law Courts on Wednesday, where plea-taking was postponed after the prosecution requested that the matter be transferred to the Milimani Law Courts.

The Kibera court directed that Karanja be presented before Milimani Court 1 to take his plea, noting concerns that proceeding with the case in Kibera could raise questions about possible claims of bias.

The matter was later handled at Milimani, where the court considered the bail application and declined to release him.

Case to Proceed in Court

The decision means Karanja will remain in custody as the case continues, unless the court issues further orders.

The case raises questions about online communication, the limits of digital expression and the legal protections available to individuals facing alleged cyber harassment.

However, the allegations against Karanja remain unproven. He is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty in court.