The widow and some children of the late renowned Nakuru Engineer Francis Macharia have suffered a blow after the High Court declined to nullify the deceased’s will, outlining the distribution of the estate.

Justice Samwel Mohochi ruled that Margaret Muthoni had no claim over her late husband’s estate, since they separated 17 years before he drafted the will on October 3, 2019.

Muthoni moved to court as an objector, alongside Macharia’s children, Peter Mbugua, Paul Mungai and Esther Wairimu, claiming she had been left out of the estate and that the will had been forged.

They fought Macharia’s other widow, Scholastica Wangu, and his children, Alex Njuguna and Ruth Wanjiku.

However, Mohochi ruled that she had no basis, since evidence showed that Muthoni left Macharia in 2002 and moved to the United States of America.

“If she feels left out, she has the option to apply for reasonable provision under the will pursuant to demonstrating evidence of dependence on the deceased (Macharia),” ruled Mohochi.

While declining to nullify the will, Mohochi said that the same was executed almost seven years before Macharia died and had three witnesses who signed on all the pages, witnessing its execution.

Further, the judge found that the will was prepared by a lawyer who not only stamped it, but was identified as its custodian to unveil it after the demise of the deceased.

“The will also incorporates all the deceased children including Mbugua ad Wairimu who claim it was forged,” posed Mohochi.

According to the court, the will, met all the requisite preconditions of validity and claims of fraud were not substantiated or proven to the required threshold.

“There is no reason to justify nullification of a Will that satisfies all the hallmarks of validity as doing so only serves to subvert the wishes of the deceased person.”

In fact, the court argued that an application to enjoin police to undertake a forensic examination of the will, indicated the presumptuous nature of alleged fraud.

“Proving fraud in Kenya requires strict, specific pleading and evidence. Fraud cannot be inferred or presumed from the facts; it must be distinctly alleged and proven. The ground fails,” he ruled.

The court also observed the three petitioners (Wangu, Njuguna and Wanjiku), unsuccessfully and repeatedly sought the objectors to enter consent and undertake a joint forensic validation of the will.

The judge dismissed the argument that non-specification of the deceased’s assets was grounds to invalidate his last wishes in the will.

“The court thus validates the will of the deceased as his last wish and testament. A grant of probate with a written will shall accordingly be issued,” ruled Mohochi.

He, however granted all aggrieved parties 45 days to appeal. The period, he ruled, shall act as a stay of execution.

The four wanted the court to authorize a document examiner to examine the signature, on the purported Will and compare the same to Macharia’s known documents.

They claimed that Muthoni was deliberately omitted from the list of Macharia’s dependents, yet she was his first wife.

They urged the court to nullify the will and order that the estate be administered in accordance with the rules governing intestate succession.

“The court should order the inclusion of 11 Motor Vehicles in the list of the properties comprising the estate of the deceased, deliberately excluded by the petitioners,” they prayed.

In response, the petitioners argued that the application lacked merit, was premature and a gross abuse of the court process.

“The objectors seek the nullification of the Will before the same is advocated by the court, at which stage they are allowed by law to give evidence respecting its purported invalidity,” the petitioners argued.

Macharia’s estate, estimated to be worth hundreds of millions, is yet to be valued.

The case shall be mentioned on September 27 for further directions.