A High Court in Embu has upheld Leo Wamuthende’s win in the Mbeere North by-election, which was challenged by Newton Kariuki Ndwiga, alias Newton Karish.

In a detailed judgement delivered by Judge Richard Mwongo on Thursday, May 21, 2026, the court has noted that the petition did not meet the required standard for the election nullification.

“The outright determination, the court finds that the petition was not proved to the required standard, and it is hereby dismissed with costs,” Judge Mwongo ruled.

“Having concluded the hearing of the election petition, I am satisfied that the petition is dismissed and the fourth respondent (Wamuthende) remains the duly elected member of parliament for Mbeere North Constituency,” the judge added.

The court noted that even though it found that there were unexplained inconsistencies in forms 35A and 35B, adding up to a 10-vote difference, with no way of knowing whom they would benefit, scrutiny of overwritten forms disclosed no major discrepancy.

Judge Mwongo avers that, under close scrutiny, the court did not find anything to suggest any irregularity in the inconsistencies, but rather a careless mistake in translocation from the vote tally column of the form. 

Notably, the court reveals that scrutiny found that 6 people assisted voters twice and made declarations in Form 32. This was in breach of Regulation 72(5)(c) of the Elections (General) Regulations and may also amount to a criminal offence.

“This evidence on assisted voters arose from scrutiny but had not been pleaded in the petition. The court cannot rely on this evidence in proof of the petition. The court cannot rely on this evidence in proof of the petition,” the court noted.

On whether there was use of state resources, state security and public office to influence voters, Judge Mwongo has stated that only evidence of the names of public officers was given but no evidence of their formal designations or offices held.

In addition, he has cited that no particulars and nature of the alleged abuses of such offices, provisions of the law breached and overall effect of such abuses upon the electorate and the election outcome were given.

The judge also ruled that it was not proved that the admitted interference with voter registration data was either widespread, systemic or intended.

He notes that there was no proof of the fact that a sole instance of interference with the register established by the court affected the will of the people.