The high-end vehicle had previously been forfeited by businessman Jared Otieno following a High Court ruling that it constituted proceeds of crime. According to auction catalogue reference ARA/PA/002/2024-2025, bidders were required to pay a 25 per cent deposit immediately upon the fall of the hammer and settle the balance within 14 days. Rytan asserts it complied with all the conditions, paying an initial deposit of Ksh4.25 million followed by successive payments totalling Ksh17 million.
However, when representatives from the company arrived to collect the vehicle on 24th June, they were turned away without a clear explanation. Instead, they were belatedly issued with a letter dated 19th June, which cited failure to pay the required deposit on time. The company alleges that the letter contained a fictitious ID number and an incorrect phone number.
“The six-day delay in disclosing this communication raises serious questions. It appears to be a calculated attempt to mislead and frustrate the auction process,” said one of the company’s directors, who accused ARA of deliberately obstructing the transaction.
In response, ARA Director General Mark Ogonji stated that the sale had been lawfully cancelled due to non-compliance with Clause 7 of the auction terms. “This is to notify you that your bid dated Wednesday 18th June 2025 for the purchase of the above-mentioned motor vehicle at an offer price of Ksh17,000,000.00 has been cancelled by the Asset Recovery Agency (ARA) on account of non-compliance,” said Mr Ogonji in an official correspondence.
In a swift legal response, Rytan, through its lawyers, issued a formal demand letter to ARA on the same day and moved to court seeking injunctive relief. On Tuesday, the court granted interim orders barring ARA from releasing, transferring or disposing of the vehicle to any third party.
“It is hereby ordered that pending the inter partes hearing of this application, a temporary injunction be and is hereby issued restraining the 1st respondent, whether by itself, its officers, servants, agents, or any other person acting under its authority, from releasing, transferring, disposing of, alienating or in any manner dealing with the Bentley Continental GT, being chassis number SCBCC1356KC072476 to any person or entity other than the applicant,” ruled Judge Lucy Njora.
The matter is scheduled for hearing on 10th July 2025 before Justice Ole Keiwua.
This case has reignited public scrutiny of ARA’s conduct. In July 2023, Justice (Prof.) Nixon Sifuna sharply criticised the agency’s operations, warning that prosecutorial and asset recovery institutions must be transparent and act in a manner that upholds public trust. He singled out ARA for what he termed a “notorious” pattern of withdrawing cases midstream and failing to offer adequate explanations.
“The bodies entrusted with the duty to fight corruption, economic crimes, organised crime and similar vices… must not abdicate their divine duty or become complicit in such vices,” Justice Sifuna said at the time.
Rytan has since alleged that despite the court order, ARA may be attempting to transfer the vehicle to the second-highest bidder, in what the company described as a “narrative of delay, obstruction and apparent collusion” that threatens the integrity of public auctions.
As the matter unfolds, all eyes will be on the judiciary to determine whether due process was followed and whether the rights of the buyer have been infringed by the very agency mandated to uphold the law.
[/full]
