Mashego v S (A31/2025) [2025] ZAGPJHC 545 (4 June 2025)

Mashego v S (A31/2025) [2025] ZAGPJHC 545 (4 June 2025)

The appellant failed to discharge the onus of proving exceptional circumstances justifying release on bail under section 60(11)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Act. His evidence was presented only by affidavit, which is less persuasive than oral testimony and could not be tested by cross-examination. The appellant's history of violent offences, commission of the alleged offences while on parole, and attempted evasion of arrest support the finding that he is a flight risk and poses a danger to public safety. The State's case is strong, with tracker and video evidence linking the appellant's wife's car to the crime scene and the recovery of stolen items. The appellant did not provide...

Citation
[2025] ZAGPJHC 545
Parties
Appellant: Dikane Selby Mashego; Respondent: The State
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
4 June 2025
Case Number
A31/2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal of Bail
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; bail remains refused.
Judges
Dosio
Legal Topics
Bail Application, Exceptional Circumstances, Balance of Probabilities, Flight Risk, Previous Convictions
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Bail Application Exceptional Circumstances Balance of Probabilities Flight Risk Previous Convictions

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

Parties

Dikane Selby Mashego

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal of Bail

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant proved exceptional circumstances justifying release on bail under section 60(11)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977.
  2. 2 Whether the court a quo erred in finding the appellant to be a flight risk without compelling evidence.
  3. 3 Whether the appellant's personal circumstances and lack of forensic evidence warranted bail.

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant failed to discharge the onus of proving exceptional circumstances justifying release on bail under section 60(11)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Act. His evidence was presented only by affidavit, which is less persuasive than oral testimony and could not be tested by cross-examination. The appellant's history of violent offences, commission of the alleged offences while on parole, and attempted evasion of arrest support the finding that he is a flight risk and poses a danger to public safety. The State's case is strong, with tracker and video evidence linking the appellant's wife's car to the crime scene and the recovery of stolen items. The appellant did not provide...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; bail remains refused.

Orders

  • The appeal of the appellant is dismissed.
  • The order of the court a quo refusing bail is confirmed.