Phusumane v The Director of Public Prosecutions (CRI/APN 616 of 18) [2018] LSHC 21 (8 March 2018)

Phusumane v The Director of Public Prosecutions (CRI/APN 616 of 18) [2018] LSHC 21 (8 March 2018)

Bail was refused because the petitioner failed to provide a substantive response to the prima facie case against him, the offence was serious and committed under circumstances likely to shock the community, public confidence in the justice system would be undermined by his release, and there was insufficient expert evidence to support his claim that prison conditions could not manage his health.

Citation
[2018] LSHC 21
Parties
Petitioner: Mahanyane Phusumane; Respondent: The Director of Public Prosecutions
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Lesotho
Judgment Date
8 March 2018
Case Number
CRI/APN 616 of 18
Procedural Posture
Bail Application / Judgment on Bail Application
Outcome
bail refused
Legal Topics
Bail, Presumption of Innocence, Attempted Murder, Interest of Justice, Right to Liberty, Health Grounds for Bail
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Bail Presumption of Innocence Attempted Murder Interest of Justice Right to Liberty Health Grounds for Bail

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mahanyane Phusumane

Petitioner

The Director of Public Prosecutions

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Bail Application / Judgment on Bail Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the petitioner should be granted bail pending trial for attempted murder
  2. 2 Whether the petitioner's health condition justifies release on bail
  3. 3 Whether the seriousness of the offence and public interest outweigh the petitioner's right to liberty

Ratio Decidendi

Bail was refused because the petitioner failed to provide a substantive response to the prima facie case against him, the offence was serious and committed under circumstances likely to shock the community, public confidence in the justice system would be undermined by his release, and there was insufficient expert evidence to support his claim that prison conditions could not manage his health.

Court Disposition

bail refused

Orders

  • Petition for bail is dismissed.