While details of the accusations remain before the courts, the case attracted interest due to Muigai’s profile and his family ties to the former Head of State.
However, Muiri Coffee Estate’s decision to disown the matter has added complexity to the dispute.
The company indicated that it had not authorised any legal action in its name regarding the case against the judges.
This clarification could have legal implications, especially if the petition had referenced the company or suggested it was a party to the proceedings.
Legal analysts say such a development may force a review of documents filed in court to establish who exactly is behind the claims.
If the company is not officially part of the case, questions could arise about representation and the basis upon which certain arguments were presented.
The twist has also sparked debate in legal circles about corporate involvement in personal or politically sensitive cases.
Observers note that when companies distance themselves from ongoing litigation, it often signals internal disagreements or concerns about reputational risk.
So far, Muigai has not publicly withdrawn his claims. It remains to be seen whether he will amend the case to reflect the company’s position or proceed in a personal capacity.
Court records are expected to clarify the next steps once the matter is mentioned again before the bench.