Messy divorce: Senator still barred from matrimonial Runda home
A magistrate on Frday confirmed orders he had issued barring Meru Senator Mithinka Linturi from accessing his Runda home, pending the determination of two cases in court.
Further, Principal Magistrate Isaac Orenge granted Ms Marianne Kitany exclusive use of their shared residence in Runda while barring Mr Linturi from contacting his estranged wife in any way.
He was also barred from harassing, intimidating, abusing or threatening her physically or sexually, and damaging or threatening to damage any of her properties.
“The sum total is that the application is merited. I find that the applicant has made out a case to warrant the issuance of the orders sought,” the court said, adding that the Runda OCS will ensure that the orders are complied with.
COLLECT PERSONAL BELONGINGS
Ms Kitany had obtained the orders in October 25, 2018, barring Mr Linturi from accessing the home and could only enter the premises to collect personal belongings, accompanied by police officers.
Ms Kitany, a former chief of staff in Deputy President William Ruto’s office, moved to court seeking protection after the lawmaker threw her out of the house.
The court heard that the two were married under Meru customary law on April 16, 2016, followed by ceremonies conducted later in December of that year. Before getting married, they had cohabited in her house in Kileleshwa.
She said, through lawyer Danstan Omari, that they bought the Mae Ridge Villa property in 2015 and the architectural drawings were under her name and that she supervised the construction.
For his part, Mr Linturi, through Muthomi Thiankolu, denied marrying her and maintained that he was married to another woman. He allegedly met her in 2013 and she asked him to accommodate her temporarily in one of his houses and also establish a small office.
But the court said on Friday that whether the two were married would be addressed by another court will handle the divorce case.
On the issue of violence against her, Mr Orenge said although the issues raised constituted criminal elements, the matter was subject to investigations by other agencies.
He also declined to address the issue of shares in companies they allegedly co-own, saying it would be dealt with by the High Court.
“There is no dispute as to the fact that the applicant and the respondent were living together in the same house since 2015,” the magistrate said.
He clarified that the orders will not apply to the children, three belonging to him from previous relationships and three belonging to her.