Police have connected the Sunday daylight robbery at Nanak House to a long-running dispute over property ownership, highlighting internal tensions that have affected the multi-tenant commercial building for years.

Speaking on Monday, August 25, 2025, Nairobi Regional Police Commander George Seda confirmed that Nanak House is a commercial property housing several legally operating businesses run by tenants with valid occupancy agreements.

The conflict, he explained, emerged between the current owner, who purchased the building from other agencies, and the tenants who were already conducting business there before the sale.

“We have established that the daylight robbery at Nanak House is connected to an ongoing ownership dispute. Nanak House is an enterprise building hosting several businesses, and conflicts have arisen between the current owner, who purchased the building from other agencies, and the tenants who were already operating there,” he said.

He disclosed that tensions intensified primarily on the building’s first floor, where a series of disputes between the current owner and four business operators eventually led to legal action.

According to Commander Seda, the tribunal ultimately ruled in favor of the tenants, affirming their legal right to continue operating their businesses on the premises while paying rent as stipulated in their agreements.

“Specifically, on the first floor, there have been repeated conflicts between the owner and four business operators who were in the building before it was sold. These disputes escalated to court, and the tribunal ruled in favour of the tenants, confirming their right to continue doing business legally and to pay rent as agreed with the owner,” he added.

Commander Seda explained that the owner of the building had objected to this arrangement, possibly with the intention of replacing the existing tenants with new occupants.

Commander Seda explained that the building’s owner had objected to the arrangement, possibly intending to replace the existing tenants with new occupants.

He added that the situation had deteriorated when the business operators refused to vacate the premises, backed by the court ruling. He said that it was at this point that hired thugs attempted to evict the tenants by force or damage their property.

“However, the owner of the property objected to this arrangement. In my view, she may have wanted these tenants removed to allow new occupants to take over. The situation escalated when the tenants, backed by the court ruling, refused to vacate, and it is believed that hired goons were brought in to forcibly evict them or damage their property,” he added.

He noted that members of the public, who were also conducting business in the building at the time, intervened to counter the attackers after one of the assailants was apprehended by authorities after being cornered by the public.

“Fortunately, the public, who were also conducting business in the building at the time, intervened. One of the assailants was cornered and arrested by members of the public,” he said.

Seda then reiterated that the use of hired thugs or goons to settle disputes, lawful or unlawful, is strictly prohibited.

He emphasised that investigations are ongoing to identify all individuals involved in orchestrating the attack and to ensure that such incidents are prevented in future.

“We want to emphasise that goons are not allowed to be used at any point, whether to carry out lawful or unlawful purposes. Investigations are ongoing to identify all those involved and to ensure that such incidents are prevented in future.”