S v Zondo (238/07) [2007] ZAFSHC 23 (8 March 2007)

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
>>
2007
>>
[2007] ZAFSHC 23
|

|

S v Zondo (238/07) [2007] ZAFSHC 23 (8 March 2007)

IN DIE
HOOGGEREGSHOF VAN SUID-AFRIKA
(ORANJE
VRYSTAATSE PROVINSIALE AFDELING)
Hersiening Nr. : 238/07
In
die hersiening tussen:-
DIE
STAAT
versus
DAVID
PHIKABESHE ZONDO
_____________________________________________________
CORAM:
CILLIé
R
et
VAN DER MERWE R
_____________________________________________________
UITSPRAAK
DEUR:
CILLIé R
_____________________________________________________
GELEWER
OP:
15 MAART 2007
_____________________________________________________
[1] Hierdie
skuldigbevinding word deur die hooflanddros van Harrismith vir
spesiale hersiening ingevolge Artikel 304(4) van Wet 51
van 1977
voorgelê. Die verrigtinge kan nie anders nie as ‘n totale fiasko
beskryf word. Dit is duidelik dat die landdros die
aanklaer sowel as
die prokureur van die beskuldigde geen benul gehad het van met welke
klagte hulle besig is nie.
[2] Die
klagte teen die beskuldigde soos uiteengesit in die klagstaat was dat
hy vier bokke ter waarde van R2 000,00 van ‘n genoemde
persoon
gesteel het. Na die klagte aan die beskuldigde gestel is, het die
landdros die beskuldigde se regsverteenwoordiger gevra
wat die
beskuldigde se pleit is. Hierop het die volgende gebeur:
“
MR
NKABINDE
As the Court pleases Your Worship. Your Worship my instructions are
that in terms of Section 113 (indistinct) Your Worship I have
prepared a statement in terms of Section 12.
COURT
Just before that sir the plea?
MR
NKABINDE
A plea of GUILTY in or on possession that is the main
count.
COURT
Does the State accept the plea?
PROSECUTOR
That is correct Your Worship.
COURT
Mr Zondo your attorney has tendered a plea of guilty on your behalf,
do you confirm the plea?
ACCUSED
Yes I do.”
[3] ‘n Verklaring is
toe deur die beskuldigde se prokureur aan die hof uitgelees en
ingehandig. Dit lees as volg:
“’
I
the undersigned Dibitse Tekabe Beshe Zondo pleads as follows on the
charge on possession of suspected stolen property as (indistinct)
in
the charge sheet with case number 960/2006.
On
the 7
th
June 2006 and at or near Magolokeng Stat in the
district of Harrismith I was found in possession of 4 goats valued at
R2 000.00 which
such possession was wrongful and unlawful.
I had purchased the goats from one Mr
Mtombeni who failed to furnish me with a receipt. (indistinct), or
transportation documents.
I
admit that I did not have any permission to possess the
abovementioned goats. I admit that the lawful owner of the goats is
Mr
Alfeus Zulu Tongwane. I plead GUILTY on my own free will and
cognisance.’”
[4] Hierop verklaar die
landdros dan as volg:
“
Having
perused the statement I am satisfied that the accused person is
admitting all the elements of the offence he has pleaded guilty
to
and as such found
GUILTY
OF POSSESSION OF LIVESTOCK
.”
[5] Dit is nie nodig om
verder na die vonnisverrigtinge te verwys nie.
[6] Dit
is duidelik uit wat hierbo uiteengesit is dat hier ‘n Babelse
verwarring by almal betrokke by die saak was aangaande waaraan
die
beskuldigde nou eintlik bedoel om skuldig te pleit en meer nog
waaraan hy skuldig bevind moes word.
[7] Die
gebruiklike redes vir skuldigbevinding van die landdros kan dit ook
nie opklaar nie, want volgens die hooflanddros van Harrismith
het die
verhoorlanddros dit van die hand gewys om enige vertoë of redes
tesame met die hersiening voor te lê. In ‘n skrywe van
haar wat
die hersiening vergesel, meld sy bloot as volg:
“
I
have studied Act 57 of 1959 and regret the mistake.
I
am agreeable that the matter be sent to High Court on Special Review.
I thank you for assistance in the
matter.”
[8] Die hooflanddros
versoek dat hierdie skuldigbevinding en vonnis tersyde gestel moet
word. Klaarblyklik moet hieraan gehoor gegee
word. Daarom word die
volgende bevel gemaak:
Die skuldigbevinding en
vonnis word tersyde gestel. Die saak word terugverwys om
de novo
deur ‘n ander landdros verhoor te word.
____________
C.B. CILLIé, R
Ek stem saam.
­________________________
C.H.G. VAN DER MERWE,
R
/sp