Faquir v S (A73/2013) [2013] ZAGPPHC 523 (15 May 2013)

Faquir v S (A73/2013) [2013] ZAGPPHC 523 (15 May 2013)

The High Court found that the Magistrate erred in refusing bail to the appellant. The refusal was based on unreliable hearsay evidence regarding alleged unlawful activities at the proposed bail address, which was not properly verified or put to the appellant or her witness for rebuttal. The Magistrate failed to make clear factual findings and did not consider imposing suitable bail conditions to mitigate any perceived risk. The appellant demonstrated sufficient ties to South Africa, willingness to surrender travel documents, and no prior convictions. The court held that the appellant's foreign nationality alone could not justify refusal of bail, and that the interests of justice permitted...

Citation
[2013] ZAGPPHC 523
Parties
Appellant: Sureia Momade Sulemane Faquir; Respondent: The State
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
15 May 2013
Case Number
A73/2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal of Bail
Outcome
Appeal upheld; Magistrate's refusal of bail set aside; appellant released on bail subject to conditions.
Judges
Makhubele
Legal Topics
Bail Application, Flight Risk, Section 60 Criminal Procedure Act, Foreign Nationals in Criminal Proceedings, Admissibility of Hearsay Evidence
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Bail Application Flight Risk Section 60 Criminal Procedure Act Foreign Nationals in Criminal Proceedings Admissibility of Hearsay Evidence

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 6 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sureia Momade Sulemane Faquir

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal of Bail

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Magistrate erred in refusing bail to the appellant.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant discharged the onus under section 60(11)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act to show that the interests of justice permit her release.
  3. 3 Whether the appellant's status as a foreign national was improperly used as a ground for refusing bail.

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court found that the Magistrate erred in refusing bail to the appellant. The refusal was based on unreliable hearsay evidence regarding alleged unlawful activities at the proposed bail address, which was not properly verified or put to the appellant or her witness for rebuttal. The Magistrate failed to make clear factual findings and did not consider imposing suitable bail conditions to mitigate any perceived risk. The appellant demonstrated sufficient ties to South Africa, willingness to surrender travel documents, and no prior convictions. The court held that the appellant's foreign nationality alone could not justify refusal of bail, and that the interests of justice permitted...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; Magistrate's refusal of bail set aside; appellant released on bail subject to conditions.

Orders

  • The bail appeal is upheld.
  • The order of the Magistrate refusing bail is set aside.