Court stops burial of KEPSHA boss as woman claiming to be his daughter seeks DNA test

In court documents, the woman asserts that her mother was married to the deceased through Kamba customary marriage.

Following their union, they established their matrimonial home in Thika, where they lived for approximately eight years. 

She claims to have been born in 1997, and although her parents separated in 1999, Nzioka continued to support her both financially and emotionally until his passing.  

According to the court papers, the plaintiff’s father was involved in a fatal accident on February 16, 2025 and his body is currently preserved at Lee Funeral Home, Nairobi.

The woman states that she was shocked to learn that her father's burial has been scheduled for February 28, 2025 at his rural home in Machakos County without her involvement.  

In court, the woman revealed that she attempted to participate in the burial arrangements and requested to be allowed to read her tribute during the ceremony and was stopped.

She is also seeking a DNA test to be conducted at a government chemist under the supervision of representatives from both sides.  

She further claims that since her father’s passing, the defendant—along with other family members—has been organizing the funeral without her involvement.

The family has allegedly denied her status as Nzioka’s daughter and argued that she has no right to participate in the burial.  

The defendants, however, stated that they are not opposed to the woman attending the burial but objected  to postponing the burial that is set for tomorrow citing logistical challenges and financial implications.  

“If the burial is postponed, it will inconvenience family members and delegates who are set to attend. Moreover, she has not provided any official documents, such as a birth certificate, to prove she is the deceased’s daughter,” argued lawyer Duncan Otieno on behalf of the defendants.  

The lady also stated that she has made multiple attempts to engage with the burial committee to resolve the matter amicably, believing that dialogue would be the best solution. However, the defendant has allegedly remained uncooperative.  

Having exhausted all informal avenues, the plaintiff decided to seek legal intervention.

The case now awaits further court directives on the burial and the DNA test request.