A Catholic priest, Father Dominic Wamugunda has moved to Court to appeal over a ruling in which he was ordered to pay Ksh 25,000 for child upkeep.
In his appeal, the priest claimed that Senior Resident Magistrate Mary Otindo who had ruled over the case failed to consider DNA testing when she issued the orders.
The case had been filed by the child’s mother on December 9, 2020.
“The learned magistrate erred in law and in fact by failing to appreciate that the plaintiff had not placed any material evidence before the court to warrant an award of Sh. 25,000 maintenance,” Wamugunda stated.
In his appeal, Father Wamugunda is also seeking a suspension of the court orders claiming that the mother of the child failed to show up for a DNA test, which had been agreed upon by both parties.
“I am aware the parties agreed to undertake testing and order recorded by consent on May 17, 2021, and I already paid for the same. On the appointed date for the DNA testing August 5, 2021, as agreed between the advocates Mr Kirimi and Mr Shisanya, the respondent did not show up,” Wamugunda stated.
The cleric had earlier denied the paternity of the 12-year-old girl adding that he has never seen the child in question before.
“I am not satisfied at all with the court finding, and that is why I have filed an appeal. I have completely denied paternity of the subject child whom I have not seen or supported since she was born and she is now 12 years old,” Wamugunda said.
He is seeking to have the matter settled urgently, stating that the mother of the child wants him arrested over failure to pay for the upkeep.
“The appellant is at risk of being arrested and incarcerated in the execution ofex parte orders,
“There is an urgent need to protect the appellant pending the hearing of the main appeal. Unless the application dated August 20, 2021, is admitted for hearing during the current High Court vacation, the appellant will suffer irreparably,” the appeal read.
However, in her ruling, the magistrate noted that the cleric did not undertake a DNA test that was scheduled by the court, stating that the cleric alleged that he was unwell.
“It has to be remembered that this court, on May 17, 2021, allowed a DNA test to be undertaken. He did not do so on an allegation he was unwell. There was no evidence placed before court to support the said position that he was incapacitated to undertake the said DNA and that the court ordered that he continue to discharge his parental responsibility,” the magistrate ruled.