Nairobi — The Court of Appeal has dismissed an Assets Recovery Agency (ARA) appeal seeking to seize $274,369 (approximately Sh36 million) held in an I&M Bank account belonging to EIS Afrika Group Limited.

A three-judge bench upheld an earlier High Court decision that found the agency had failed to provide sufficient evidence showing that the funds were proceeds of crime.

The case arose in March 2024 after EIS Afrika received a $350,000 foreign wire transfer. Suspecting that the money was linked to money laundering, ARA froze the account and sought forfeiture of the remaining balance under the Proceeds of Crime and Anti-Money Laundering Act (POCAMLA).

In its defence, EIS Afrika, which has an affiliate in Burundi, said it had won a $5.03 million World Bank-funded tender to construct and install facilities at the Kavimvira Border Post.

Keep up with the latest headlines on WhatsApp | LinkedIn

The company said the funds were routed through its Kenyan account to procure vehicles and equipment from Dubai due to strict foreign exchange and importation restrictions in Burundi.

EIS Afrika presented tender documents, invoices and correspondence to support its explanation of the source and use of the funds.

In June 2025, the High Court ruled that ARA had failed to provide concrete evidence to support its allegations. It also found that some claims, including allegations of massive cash withdrawals, were not supported by bank records.

ARA subsequently appealed the decision at the Court of Appeal.

In dismissing the appeal, the Court of Appeal found that the agency had failed to establish, on a balance of probabilities, a direct link between the funds and criminal conduct.

The court stressed that suspicion, large transactions or unusual international movements of money are not, on their own, sufficient to establish that funds are proceeds of crime.

When asked to substantiate claims in an investigator's affidavit regarding large cash withdrawals, ARA's lawyer admitted that the description was incorrect, calling it "a slip of our side."

The appellate court also found that ARA had relied on an unverified email address and an unauthenticated cyber-forensic report.

It further noted that the agency had not independently verified the company's claims with the World Bank or the Burundi Embassy.