Nyama Mama Restaurant directors, Ninaa Shanghavi and her husband Jayesh Shanghavi, have filed a court application asking for a compensation of Ksh 2 billion for what they term as wrongful prosecution.
The couple who have filed the case at the Milimani High Court are requesting the court to issue orders barring any further criminal charges related to their financial dealings with Victoria Commercial Bank Limited.
“An order that the respondents jointly and severally do pay the petitioners general aggravated and exemplary damages for the infringement of the constitutional rights and for emotional distress , financial losses and the disruption of their business and livelihoods in the sum of 2 billion shillings,” partly reads the papers
They argue that the escalation of what was essentially a civil matter into a criminal proceeding was unwarranted, claiming there was no credible evidence to support allegations of criminal wrongdoing.
“The respondents’ actions amounted to malicious prosecution and constituted a gross violation of fundamental rights and freedoms,” the court documents further states.
In mid-2024, a Nairobi court withdrew a Ksh 520 million fraud case that had been pressed against the duo.
Their initial attempt to have the case withdrawn was thwarted by the Director of Public Prosecution(DPP) who claimed the then evidence on record was sufficient to sustain the charge.
However, the (DPP) later applied to withdraw the charges, arguing that the matter would be better addressed through civil proceedings.
Through their lawyers, Danstan Omari and Martina Swiga, the directors maintain that the ordeal caused them immense frustration and negatively impacted their personal and business affairs.
They are now seeking a court order directing the respondents to cease and desist from any further interference in their business operations, private lives, or legal entitlements.
“The company faced significant financial strain and challenges as a result of COVID Pandey, economic hardship and other constraints which severely disrupted business operations, despite the challenges the directors remained committed to fulfilling its financial obligation with Victoria Commercial Bank,” they argue.
The case is between the couple who are the 1st and 2nd petitioners versus 11 respondents including Victoria Bank.
