Osotsi attack: Suspects to remain in police custody
Vihiga Senator Godfrey Osotsi recuperates at Karen Hospital on Thursday, April 9, a day after he was attacked in Kisumu.
Three suspects linked to the recent attack on Vihiga Senator Godfrey Osotsi will remain in police custody for seven days.
This is after a Kisumu court allowed investigators more time to complete inquiries into the incident.
Appearing before Magistrate Daniel Chumba on Friday, the suspects Carlos Owiti, Eric Otieno and Vincent Odhiambo were ordered detained at Kisumu Central Police Station as police finalise investigations into an alleged offence of robbery with violence.
The three suspects arrested for the violent attack on Senator Osotsi at Java House in Kisumu will be arraigned in court on April 10, 2026.
The prosecution had sought a 14-day custodial order, arguing that detectives required additional time to gather evidence and conclude investigations under Section 296(2) of the Penal Code, which carries severe penalties upon conviction.
The application, supported by an affidavit sworn by Corporal Paul Buluma, cited the complexity of the case and the need for forensic analysis.
According to the affidavit, the initial report of the incident was made by the complainant’s bodyguard, who was present during the alleged attack.
The prosecution told the court that the complainant, Senator Osotsi, is still receiving treatment in hospital and has not yet recorded a formal statement.
Corporal Buluma, while being cross-examined by defence counsel Ken Omollo, said several key steps in the investigation were still pending.
These include recording statements from crucial witnesses, conducting an identification parade and analysing CCTV footage that could shed light on the incident.
He further told the court that the suspects were arrested from undisclosed locations and that their places of residence had not been firmly established, raising concerns about the possibility of their absconding or interfering with witnesses.
State counsel Mr Museti argued that in such applications, the prosecution is only required to demonstrate, on a balance of probability, that it is acting in good faith and that continued detention is necessary to facilitate investigations. He urged the court to consider the gravity of the offence, the need to preserve evidence and the likelihood of witness interference.
“The offence under investigation is serious and involves multiple elements, including forensic examination. There is a need to protect witnesses and safeguard the integrity of the investigations,” the prosecution submitted.
However, defence lawyer Ken Omollo opposed the application, terming it premature and lacking merit.
He argued that the suspects had not been formally charged and that the practice of detaining individuals without presenting charges in court should be discouraged
Mr Omollo questioned the basis of the application, noting that even the complainant had not recorded a statement, and no identification parade had been conducted.
He raised concerns about the legality of detaining the suspects without sufficient evidence linking them to the alleged offence.
“What happens if, after holding these suspects, the police establish that they are not culpable? The court must guard against illegal detention,” he argued.
The defence further maintained that the suspects had voluntarily presented themselves to the police and were not a flight risk.
Mr Omollo also dismissed claims that the suspects could interfere with witnesses, pointing out that the complainant is a sitting senator with access to state protection mechanisms.
He urged the court to reject the prosecution’s application and instead release the suspects on reasonable bail or bond terms.
In his ruling, Magistrate Chumba said he had considered the submissions from both sides and the provisions of Section 36A of the Criminal Procedure Code, which allows courts to grant custodial orders where investigations are incomplete.
While the court found that some grounds advanced by the prosecution, such as the need for an identification parade, were not sufficiently compelling at this stage, it acknowledged that key aspects of the investigation remained unresolved.
“I take note that there are crucial witnesses who are yet to record statements and there exists a likelihood of interference,” the magistrate ruled, adding that the seriousness of the offence could not be overlooked.
The court also noted that police had complied with the constitutional requirement to present the suspects in court within 24 hours of arrest but had not had adequate time to conclude investigations.
Given the circumstances, the magistrate partially allowed the application, granting investigators seven days, half of the period sought to complete their inquiries.
“Considering the seriousness of this offence I'm persuaded to grant the applicant time to conclude the investigation. Therefore, I will order that the respondents be held at Kisumu Central Police Station for a period of 7 days to enable conclusion of investigations,” the court ruled.
The suspects will remain in custody at Kisumu Central Police Station pending further mention of April 17, 2026.
Follow our WhatsApp channel for breaking news updates and more stories like this.
