About SAFLII
Databases
Search
Terms of Use
RSS Feeds
South Africa: Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
>>
2011
>>
[2011] ZAFSHC 53
|
|
S v Sefadi and Others (86/2011) [2011] ZAFSHC 53 (10 March 2011)
FREE STATE HIGH
COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH
AFRICA
Review No. : 86/2011
In
the review between:
THE
STATE
versus
TEBOHO DAVID SEFADI
…...............................................
First
Accused
BONGANI QEKE
….......................................................
Second
Accused
SOLOMON MASIJANE
….................................................
Third
Accused
_____________________________________________________
CORAM:
MOCUMIE
et
MOLOI, JJ
_____________________________________________________
JUDGMENT BY:
MOLOI, J
DELIVERED
ON:
10 MARCH 2011
_____________________________________________________
REVIEW JUDGMENT
_____________________________________________________
MOLOI, J
[1] This matter emanates
from the Magistrate, Welkom. It was referred to this Court to correct
a defect done by the presiding magistrate
who imposed a sentence in
excess of the prescribed sentence prescribed by the Trespass Act, No.
6 of 1959.
[2] The three accused
pleaded guilty and were duly convicted of contravening the provisions
of section 1(1)(a) of The Trespass Act,
No. 6 of 1959, in that they
unlawfully entered the grounds of President Steyn Gold Plant in
Welkom without the permission of the
lawful occupier. The presiding
officer sentenced each of them to 3 (three) years imprisonment
conditionally suspended for 5 (five)
years.
[3] Section 2 of the said
Act provides as follows:
“
Any person
convicted of an offence under section 1 shall be liable to a fine not
exceeding R2 000-00 or imprisonment for a period
not exceeding two
years or to both such fine and such imprisonment.”
[4] The presiding
magistrate referred to matter for review and stated:
“
I humbly
apply to the Honourable Judge to amend my sentence from three years
imprisonment to two years imprisonment, and the rest
may remain the
same.”
[5] The sentence of three
years imprisonment is clearly not in accordance with justice being
above the sentence prescribed by law.
In the circumstances the
sentence of three years imprisonment is set aside and substituted for
the following sentence:
“
Two
years imprisonment wholly suspended for a period of 5 (five) years on
condition that each accused is not found guilty of contravention
of
section 1(1)(a) of The Trespass Act, No. 6 of 1959, being on mine
premises or property without the permission of the lawful
occupier,
committed during the period of suspension.”
The above sentence is
pre-dated to 8 February 2011.
________
MOLOI, J
I concur.
___________
MOCUMIE, J
/sp