About SAFLII
Databases
Search
Terms of Use
RSS Feeds
South Africa: Supreme Court of Appeal
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: Supreme Court of Appeal
>>
2006
>>
[2006] ZASCA 104
|
|
S v Sikhosana (98/05) [2006] ZASCA 104; [2006] SCA 133 (RSA) (3 November 2006)
THE SUPREME COURT OF
APPEAL
OF SOUTH AFRICA
Case number : 098/05
Not reportable
In
the matter between :
HOPEWELL
JABULANI SIKHOSANA APPELLANT
and
THE STATE RESPONDENT
CORAM : CAMERON, CONRADIE et CLOETE JJA
HEARD : IN CHAMBERS
DELIVERED : 3 NOVEMBER 2006
Neutral citation: This judgment may be referred to as
Sikhosana v S [2006]
SCA 133 (RSA).
_________________________________________________________
JUDGMENT
CLOETE JA
/
CLOETE JA:
[1] The
appellant was one of six accused convicted in the Venda High Court of
murder and robbery with aggravating circumstances. All
were sentenced
to life imprisonment on the murder charge. Accused 6, Mr Samson
Shonisani Ralukukwe, appealed to this court. His conviction
and
sentence were set aside.
[2] In
its judgment, this court said:
â
On
the above analysis, and to put the position at its lowest, it would
seem that accused 4 and 5 may also have been wrongly convicted.
Counsel representing the State on appeal could point to no additional
facts which would put them in a different position to the appellant.
I would accordingly request the Venda and Bloemfontein Justice
Centres, which represented the appellant in this appeal, to apply
for
leave to appeal on behalf of accused 4 and 5 as a matter of urgency
once the necessary powers of attorneys have been obtained.
It would
be desirable, particularly in view of the length of the record, for
any appeal by accused 4 and 5 to be heard by this court
as presently
constituted and we have retained our copies of the record to obviate
the expense of a new record being prepared.â
[3] Having
obtained a power of attorney from the appellant, the Venda Justice
Centre applied to the Venda High Court for leave to
appeal on behalf
of the appellant, who was accused 4. Accused 5 had died in prison.
Leave was granted, without opposition from the
State, on 12 September
2006.
[4] The
representative of the State, in his heads of argument filed in this
court, conceded the appeal â in my view correctly â
and indicated
that there would be no appearance for the State unless this court
directed otherwise. It was accordingly unnecessary
for oral argument
to be heard and the appeal was dealt with in chambers.
[5] This
court is grateful for the assistance of the Venda and Bloemfontein
Justice Centres.
[6] The
conviction of the appellant and the sentence imposed on him are set
aside.
______________
T D CLOETE
JUDGE OF APPEAL
Concur: Cameron JA
Conradie JA