Betika Kenya is staring at a possible shutdown of its betting operations as fresh High Court documents expose a fierce legal battle over disputed gambling licences, unresolved customer data complaints and accusations that the company withheld crucial information from the court.
In written submissions dated Monday, October 12, 2026, and filed at the Milimani High Court in Nairobi, petitioner Benedict Kabugi Ndungu accuses Betika, operated by Shop and Deliver Limited, of benefiting from fresh gambling licences issued before serious complaints against the company were formally resolved.
The petitioner now wants the court to stop Betika from operating under the disputed licences, including suspending its betting website, Paybill services, SMS services and USSD platforms.
Betika faces fresh licence scandal
According to the court documents, Betika received fresh gambling licences dated October 2 and October 6, 2026, despite unresolved complaints submitted to the Gambling Regulatory Authority of Kenya.
The complaints were filed on May 19, July 3 and August 31, 2026, raising questions about regulatory compliance and the company’s suitability to hold a gambling licence.
The petitioner argues that the regulator approved new licences without first completing the required examination of those complaints.
More seriously, the submissions accuse Betika and the regulator of withholding important licensing information during court proceedings.
“A licence signed on 2nd October cannot have been overlooked on 5th, 6th and 7th October. The fact was known. It was not told,” the court documents state.
The petitioner describes this as “a deliberate material non-disclosure.”
These accusations remain disputed matters before the court and have not been established as judicial findings.
Court asked to shut down Betika payment channels
Betika’s operations now face a direct legal challenge after the petitioner asked the High Court to extend interim orders issued on October 6, 2026.
law and authority lawyer concept, judgment gavel hammer in court courtroom for crime judgement legislation and judicial decision, judge having justice of punishment guilt and criminal verdict legal
The petitioner argues that the orders restrict the use of fresh gambling licences while the regulator examines pending complaints.
According to the submissions, Betika’s continued operation through betting platforms and payment channels raises questions about compliance with those restrictions.
The applicant wants the court to direct the regulator to stop giving effect to the disputed licences.
The court documents specifically seek orders requiring “the websites, the USSD codes, the SMS services and the paybills to cease to operate under any fresh licence.”
If granted and implemented, the orders could interrupt Betika’s ability to receive betting payments and provide services under those licences.
However, the requested shutdown has not been granted in the material supplied.
Customer data controversy follows Betika
The licensing dispute also brings fresh attention to concerns involving Safaricom subscribers’ personal information.
The petitioner wants the regulator to examine DCI cyber-forensics material and findings referenced in Constitutional Petition E095 of 2026 before determining Betika’s suitability for licensing.
The application raises concerns about whether information obtained through data breaches was commercially exploited.
However, the documents do not establish that Betika stole customer information or committed any criminal offence.
Instead, the petitioner argues that unresolved integrity complaints should undergo proper investigation before the regulator makes licensing decisions.
The submissions further state that Betika’s General Counsel, Paul Mutegi, and the regulator’s Director-General, Peter Karimi, acknowledged in sworn affidavits dated October 5 that the complaints had not received a final administrative determination.
Betika fights to merge court cases
Meanwhile, Betika is seeking to join the Milimani proceedings as a second respondent and have the dispute consolidated with a separate constitutional petition before the Murang’a High Court.
The petitioner strongly opposes the move, arguing that the Murang’a proceedings concern older gambling licences while the Milimani case focuses on fresh licences for the 2026/2027 period.
Betika has also challenged the proceedings on the basis that available alternative remedies have not been exhausted.
The documents indicate that the company filed a notice of appeal against the October 6 interim orders.
The petitioner is additionally seeking permission to commence contempt proceedings over the continued operation of fresh licences.
He wants the regulator compelled to submit a sworn report within seven days explaining the licensing decisions and steps taken to comply with court orders.
The High Court must now determine whether to extend the restrictions, order the suspension of services operating under the disputed licences and require further regulatory action.
For Betika customers, the immediate concern is whether the company’s betting and payment services could be interrupted if the court grants the requested orders.
The case remains pending, and the supplied submissions do not establish that Betika’s licences have been cancelled or that the company has been found guilty of the accusations against it.
