PW3 RITESH PATEL

The third prosecution witness PW3 stated that the accused is known to him and
that he was his workmate as an operations clerk at Elgon Kenya Company. He
stated that the accused responsibility was to handle orders from customers on
behalf of sales persons who are away in the field and the accused was also
tasked in giving quotations to customers. He gave exhibit of pro-forma invoices
from Elgon Kenya ltd marked as MF1 3,4,5 and 6. He stated that the pro-forma
invoices are usually typed by the secretary Lucy (PW2). He also stated that it is
the accused who would instruct Lucy to prepare the pro-forma invoice and that
the accused could sign the pro-forma invoice on behalf of sales persons who are
away. He stated that in such instances the accused was required to sign on the
pro-forma invoice.

He testified that on the 8th day of September 2011, some customers came to the
office to claim some goods that had been supplied to the accused and that the
said customers had pro-forma invoices. He stated that he saw the customer
namely Mr Kamau and Mr Maina as shown on the pro-forma invoices he
produced in Court as exhibit MF1 3, 4, 5 and 6. He stated that he told them that
he needed to confirm them with the production department and the customers
said they did not have such an order. He also stated that Mr. Kamau insisted that
they had been informed their good were ready, and he told them that the
company was not aware of any order from them. He stated that he summoned
the accused as the customers insisted that they had dealt with the accused and
when accused came he said the customers had not been prepared. He stated that
Mr Kamau insisted that he had made payments appearing on the pro-forma
invoice. He stated that on checking their accounts he noticed that the company
had not received those amounts.

He stated that it is the accused who signed the pro-forma invoices using PW3’s
name and that the name appearing on the pro-forma invoices is his but the
signature is not his. He further stated that he did not authorise accused to sign
on his behalf and if he was absent he was required to sign using his own name.
He stated that the name on the pro-forma invoices was not received by the
company and he explained the normal practice they used in receiving money
from clients. He stated that the money is supposed to be received by the cashier
and the receipt issued. He stated that it emerged the said customers had only
dealt with the accused and that they were not known to him. He said that when
they went to the boss the accused claimed that one of the female customers had
come to take the money back and cancelled the order. He also averred that he
did not have any disagreements with the accused.

PW5 & PW6 231671 CIP ALEX MWONGERA and 71023 Inspector John
Shegu. The statements given by PW6 was corroborated by that PW5 which
confirmed that the signature appearing on the pro-forma invoices adduced in
court actually belonged to the accused. Hereby produced exhibits marked B1-
B8, specimen signatures of the accused person which informed the opinion that
the signatures was made by the same author who signed the pro-forma invoices
marked MFI 3, 4, and 5.

DW1, TOM ABAKALWA stated that he used to work as a Sales Assistant but
currently he is a security officer in Nairobi. He stated that the issues concerning
this case began in 2011 and on the 14th day of September customers went to
Elgon Kenya ltd Co to buy goods. He stated that he received Monica Wachira &
Mungai (PW1) of which he learnt that Monica had brought goods from the
Company before. He stated that it was Monica who introduced him to PW1 and
he proceeded to issue them with the quotation and instructed Lucy (PW2) to
give them a pro-forma invoice as they wanted to purchase UVA paper.

He confirmed that he told them that the material was to be imported and that he
could give them reference because they wanted the material immediately. He
stated that importation was to take 2 weeks. He stated that Monica asked him to
receive Ksh.400 000 of which he returned to her the following day after she told
him that the client wasn’t comfortable. He stated that a month later, Monica
informed him that their husband would be coming to place more orders and that
she would accept the money. He stated that Mungai came with Kamau and
Kamau told me not discuss the order with Mungai and that he should receive the
money for security reasons. He stated that on the 6th day of September, Kamau
came to our company and asked for the goods, however, he told him that they
were to be sourced at a later date. He stated that PW1 called Monica who was at
Mana and that he would accompany him there. He stated that as they were
heading back to Nairobi they stopped at Githurai where he was taken to a bar
and there he met two men who identified themselves as police officers who
arrested him in connection of the alleged offence in the instance case.