Nairobi — Questions are mounting over the strength of the prosecution’s case against Oki General Trading (Kenya) after its star witness, Deepak Rajoriya, struggled under cross-examination in a Sh356 million tax evasion trial.
What had been framed as a straightforward case of corporate misappropriation took a dramatic turn when Rajoriya once touted as the whistleblower, failed to provide clear answers on the origins of his allegations.
His testimony, built on a contested audit he commissioned, has now raised more doubts than it has resolved.
Court records revealed that Rajoriya, an accountant with ties to the company’s parent firm abroad, entered Kenya on December 25, 2024, using a tourist visa.
Barely two weeks later, on January 16, 2025, he was appointed a director of Oki General Trading.
Within days of taking up the role, he ordered a forensic audit that later formed the backbone of the prosecution’s claims of a Sh356 million misappropriation.
The defense team pounced on this timeline, arguing that the speed of Rajoriya’s elevation from tourist to company director to whistleblower was both suspicious and unprecedented.
They also highlighted that Oki General Trading has consistently filed annual independent audit reports, none of which had flagged the discrepancies now being alleged.
Under pressure in court, Rajoriya admitted that he had not conducted any internal investigation nor accessed original company records.
His accusations rested solely on the audit he personally commissioned, raising questions about its independence.
When asked how such a massive financial hole could have gone unnoticed in previous audits used for tax filings, he was unable to provide a coherent response.
The case took another twist when it emerged that the Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) has already levied a Sh356 million penalty against Oki General Trading—the exact same figure Rajoriya claims was misappropriated. The coincidence has fueled speculation that the company might be attempting to reframe a tax liability as corporate theft, shifting the burden from unpaid taxes to alleged internal fraud.
“The numbers match too neatly,” one lawyer observing the proceedings told reporters outside the Milimani Law Courts. “It raises the question of whether this case is really about theft—or about avoiding a tax bill.”
The courtroom drama has cast a shadow over the prosecution’s credibility, with Rajoriya’s shaky testimony weakening the narrative of a clean-cut financial scandal. Instead, the trial has exposed deep contradictions, leaving the public to wonder whether the Sh356 million at the center of the dispute is missing money or simply unpaid tax.
The case continues, with the defense pressing for the audit’s credibility to be struck out as evidence.