CC46/2024 /hvr
2025-06-05
1 SENTENCE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG DIVISION HELD AT PRETORIA
CASE INO: CC46/2024
DATE: 2025-06-05
DELETE WH IC HE VER IS N O~.._PLICABL E
(1) R EPORT A BLE : YE S .Q:!9,'
(2) OF INTE R E S T TO O TH ER JUDGE S : YE S /~_p)
(3) R 5f'ISED
............................... '/···· ............. .
SIG NATURE
DATE : ... c?.6.. 0? ..... ?-o >-~
In the matter between
THE STATE
and
FANYANA KHOZA Accused
SENTENCE
MOSOPA, J:
1. This is judgment on sentence. On 4 June 2025
convicted the accused on the following charges:
Count 1 : Murder read with provisions of section
51 ( 1) o f Act 1 05 of 199 7
Count 2: Attempted robbery as de fined in section 1
of Act 51 of 1977 read with the provisions of section
51 (2) of Act 105 of 1997
Count 3: Cont ravention of section 49(1 ) of the

10
20
CC46/2024 /hvr
2025-06-05
2 SENTENCE
Immigration Act 13 of 2002.
Count 6 : Possession of stolen property in
contravention of section 36 of the General Law
Amendment Act 62 of 1955 .
2 . The accused is still represented by Mr Jacobs in
these sentencing proceedings and the State is still
represented by Mr Masekoameng .
3. The accused and his group meticulously and with
more precision planned a robbery of the complainant
mentioned in Count 2 . It is indicative from the
evidence that Zweli, who was not arrested for the
commission of the offences, that the accused is
convicted of, played a crucial role in informing the
accused and his group about the movements of the
complainant; the type of vehicle he was driving; the
route that he uses travel to his place of residence
and also where the complainant resides. The Accused
with his group followed the complainant on various
occasions to his place of residence before the actual
act of robbery was co mmitted.
4. Brazenly, they have managed to secure firearms and
ammunition and unfortunately, they could not secure
a rifle as planned and that actually interfered with

10
20
CC46/2024 /hvr
2025-06-05
2 SENTENCE
their planning, as in my considered view, if the rifle
was used there was no way in which the complainant
could have defended him self.
5. Section 12 of the Constitution of the Republic of
South Africa, enshrines one's right to freedom and
security of the person, and makes the following
provision:
"[12] (1) Everyone has the right to
freedom and security of the person, which
includes the right -
(a) not to deprived of freedom arbitrarily
or without just cause,
(b) not to be detained without trial,
(c) to be free from all forms of violence
from either public or private
resources,
(d) not to be tortured in any way, and
(e) not to be treated or punished in a
cruel, inhumane or degrading way."
6 . That is the right that the accused , together with his
group arbitrarily decided to take away from the
complainant in this matter, whereas the accused
and his group's right to freedom and security of the
person is secured and protected, at the time.

10
CC46/2024 /hvr
2025-06-05
3 SENTENCE
Equally, the Constitution pro.tects and enshrines the
rights to human dignity and life in sections 10 and
11 .
7. In State v Zinn 1969 (2) SA 537(A) Rumpff JA ,
stated that:
"What has to be considered is the triad of
the crime, the offender and the interest of
society. In determining what is an
appropriate sentence, the dictum set out in
Zinn ought to be invoked." A further I aye r of
what needs to be considered was imposed
in the sentencing regime .... in section 51(1)
and (3) of Act 105 of 1997 .
8 . The accused testified in mitigation of
sentence and his testimony can be
succinctly summarised as follows;
a) That he was born on the 9th of September 1973 and
he will be 52 years in September of this year,
20 b) At the time of commission of the offences in 2021 ,
the accu sed was 47 years old,
c) The accused is not married , but has three
dependants , two daughters and a boy and the last
born child was · born on 3 November 2021 , while the
accused was in custody for this matter.

CC46/2024 /hvr
2025-06-05
3 SENTENCE
d) The first-born child was born on 5 January 2001
and the second born child in 2004 and is currently
21 years old.
e) The accused was born in the Hluhluwe in Kwazulu­
Natal Province.
f) H is father passed away when he was still young
and his mother passed away in 1993 .
g) H is only brother died when he was released from
prison on the 2 August 2015 .
10 h) The accused did not enjoy the privilege of having a
20
forma l schooling for reasons that were not
ventilated in this matter, He only learned trade
while he was in custody serving sentence, and was
trained in upholstery, sewing and plastering. He
also did a literacy course in prison when he was
taught how to read and write.
i) The accused was self-employed In what he
described as a middleman , for people who brought
taxis that we re involved in collisions, and referred
them to people who could panel beat and repair
such taxis for a fee.
9. The accused is suffering from hypertension, but he is
receiving medication for such in prison. The accused
was released on parole on 6 March 2015, and such

CC46/2024 /hvr
2025-06-05
5 SENTENCE
parole was rescinded after his arrest in this matter,
and he is currently serving an imprisonment term of 30
years. This means that the accused committed the
offences that he is currently convicted of whilst
serving his parole term.
10. On 12 September 2002 , the accused was convicted on
two counts of robbery and sentenced to 15 years
imprisonment for each count of robbery. The accused
10 maintains that he was only sentenced to 18 years
imprisonment, following that conviction. On 6
December 2004 , he was sentenced to 3 years
imprisonment, alternatively R2000 ,00 fine for being in
possession of drugs.
11 . On 28 January 2005 , at Meyerton , the accused was
sentenced to 15 years imprisonment for robbery. On
the 29 June 2005 , the accused was sentenced to five
years imprisonment for housebreaking, and it was
20 ordered that that sentence runs concurrently with the
15 -year sentence for robbe ry. The accused 's previous
convictions are as listed on the SAP69.
12. The accused added that he was sentenced to 10 years
imprisonment for "hijacking a motor vehicle" in 2004 or

CC46/2024 /hvr
2025-06-05
6 SENTENCE
2005 and that is when he was arrested trying to bring
drugs to court. This conviction is not listed on the
accused's SAP69 , as supplied by the South African
Police ..
13. This basically indicates the type of a person that the
accused is, A person who was in wanton disregard of
the law and with little respect to other people's
properties. The accused has dependants , and it shows
10 that the time he spent serving various sentences,
made him to delegate his responsibilities of raising his
children to his partner. The accused is also not
responsible for their maintenance. He does not have
formal identification documents.
14. The accused grew up without a .father figure in his life,
as his father passed away when he was still young in
his life. His mother also died when the accused was
still a young person. Despite the Court's finding
20 relating to his status in the country, the accused
insisted that he is a South Africa citizen, born in South
Africa.
15 . The State did not lead evidence in aggravation of
sentence and also did not present the victim impact

7
statements. H owever, it is the evidence of Mr Gani
that after the commission of the offence, he
considered emigrating to another country and then
thought against it. There was a time when he took his
family and spent a considerable time in a foreign
country, because of what happened to him. He has
now involved the services of a security company, who
act as his protectors. Mr Gani feels that his freedom is
taken away from him , and as he must always be in the
10 company of his protectors
16 . Mr Gani's motor vehicle was damaged during the
incident, fortunately for him, he had insurance which
swiftly replaced his damaged vehicle. He was not
seriously injured during the incident, but only
sustained cuts to his hands and his face which was as
a result of his vehicle window , when it was broken with
a hammer by his attackers.
20 17 . The recent South Africa Police Statistics show that
violent contact crimes are on the rise. The offences
that the accused has been convicted of, cu rrently and
in the past, except for the possession of drugs, have
in them elements of violence and the majority of them
are committed with the use of firearms.

8
18. Violent crimes by and largely affects the majority of
South African people. The situation is compounded by
a lack of capacity and resources in the law
enforcement agencies. This offence was comm itted in
a busy public road, which is situated next to the
military establishment in full
bystanders, but the po lice
view of passerby and
could not detect the
commission timeously to arrest the perpetrators. It is
because of a bravery displayed by the complainant, Mr
1 0 G a n i , t h at t h e co m m i s s i o n of t h e off e n c e s co u I d n o t
materialise and one of the robbers met his death.
20
19. In light of the current high levels of violence and the
serious crimes in the country, when sentencing such
crimes the emphasis should be on retribution and
deterrence. In State v Mhlakaza 1997 (1) SACR 515
(SCA) Harms J, when dealing with the public interest
stated that:
" The object of sentencing is not to satisfy
public opinion but to serve the public
interest. A sentencing policy that caters
predominantly or exclusively for public
opinion is inherently flawed. It remains the
court's duty to impose fearlessly an
appropriate and fair sentence, even if the

10
20
CC46/2024 /hvr
2025-06-05
9
sentence does not satisfy the public."
SENTENCE
20. However , it is acceptable for the Court to take
account of public feelings as was expressed in
the matter of R v Karg . The point that I want to
emphasise in this judgment , is that it appears that
there are serious problems with our parole system .
It is not unusual to hear in the news or to read
newspapers that most people who commit serious
crimes are released on parole and such crimes are
committed whilst having their parole time. It
appears that the monitoring of parolees is also a
problem in our country. The accused had time to
plan these offences, travelled to other places
without being detected by officials monitoring him ,
and eventually committing the offences.
21. The accused first sentence of 15 years, 18
years on his version, was in 2002. In January
2005 , he was already convicted again of a serious
violent crime. The indication is that, he was out on
parole when he committed that offence. Again ,
when he committed the current offences, he was
out on parole. One wonders how the Parole Board
failed to consider the offences the accused

10
committed after his first release on parole. Did
such record serve before the Parole Board, which
decided to release the accused on 6 March 2015?
22. The accused was released on parole without
proper documentation which includes the
identification book . I am going to recommend that
a copy of this judgment to be served on the
Minister of Correctional Services to determine the
10 parole process of sentenced prisoners.
20
23 . The accused is convict~d of murder which falls
squarely within the purview of section 51(1) of Act
105 of 1997 , as it was committed in the process of
a robbery and committed by a group of people
acting in concert. The accused , in terms of section
51 (3) may show the existence of substantial and
compelling ci rcu m stances to avoid life
imprisonment term. In State v Ros/ee 2006 (1)
SACR 537 para 33, it was stated:
"There is no onus on the accused to
prove such circumstances, but that
he should at least pertinently raise
such circumstances for
consideration if he wants the Court

10
20
1 1
to consider them seriously."
24. T he essence of Malgas can be
separated into four different aspects:
1. That the prescribed sentence is the point of
departure.
2 . If a departure is called for, the Court should
not hesitate to depart.
3 .The Court should weigh all the traditional
circumstances for departing when the
prescribed sentence would be unjust.
Ma/gas also cau tioned us not to depart from the
Prescribed Sentences for flimsy reasons.
25 . The accused , despite overwhelming evidence
against him , maintains his innocence and this
signals lack of remorse . This is so despite making a
confession statement to the police. However , a
lack of remorse cannot amount to an aggravating
factor.
26 . Mr Jacobs cannot find what can be substantial
and compelling circumstances on the part of the
accused , but that I must consider the fact that the
accused did not have a father figure in his life,
when he grew up , as he was raised by his mother

10
20
12
who also died when the accused was still young. M r
Masekoameng also could not find substantial and
compelling circumstances on the part of the
accused , so is this Court.
27. The accused is the type of person who made
crime his livelihood. This is demonstrated by the
fact that he does not have a birth certificate, ID­
Book and documentation in this country. I do not
see the accused being a suitable candidate for
rehabilitation, despite previously being given a
second chance to make amends in his life.
Accused , you are a habitual criminal with total
disrespect for human rights and properties.
28. Your co-accused who testified in this court and
who are already serving their sentences, are also
illegal immigrants in this country. The sentence that
I am going to impose , I want it to be a sentence
that serves as a measure of deterrence and
retribution to the people who choose your criminal
path. It is unfortunate that I have to sentence you
to imprisonment for a very lengthy period of time at
your age. Failure to show existence of substantial
and compe lling circumstances, I am left with no
choice but to sentence you to the prescribed

13
sentence. I am alive to the fact that the sentence
that I am going to
impose, is an ultimate penalty that our courts can
impose , and su eh sentence shou Id be imposed after a
thorough consideration.
29. In the matter of State v Vilakazi 2009 (1) SACR
552 it was said that:
"In the event or case of conviction of a
10 serious crime, the personal circumstances
of an accused recedes to the background."
30 . It is for the above that the following will
be your sentence:
Count 1: You are sentenced to life
imprisonment.
Count 2: You are sentenced to 10 years
imprisonment.
Count 3: You are sentenced to 2 years
20 imprisonment.
Count 6: You are sentenced to 12 months
imprisonment.
31. The sentence in Count 1 , which is life
imprisonme nt will together with sentences imposed

• 14
on Co unts 2, 3 and 6 run concurrently with th e
sentence that the acc used is currently serving.
Y es , that will be your sentence.
MOSOPA , J
JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT
10 DATE: .. ~'.'$./tf./?..r J..S