S v Rabele (76/2014) [2016] ZAFSHC 178 (29 September 2016)

S v Rabele (76/2014) [2016] ZAFSHC 178 (29 September 2016)

The court found that although the accused did not disclose previous convictions for abduction and theft, these convictions were thirty-six and twenty-six years old, and the accused credibly asserted that he acted on legal advice not to disclose them. There was no evidence that the accused intended to mislead the court or evade justice. While the accused was arrested on other charges while released on warning, he had not been convicted of those offences and had attended court regularly. The interest of justice did not require termination of his release on warning, as there were no sufficient grounds to justify such an order under section 72A of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Citation
[2016] ZAFSHC 178
Parties
Applicant: THE STATE; Respondent: MACEBO JOSEPH RABELE
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 September 2016
Case Number
76/2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal Law Application / Application for Termination of Release on Warning Pending Criminal Trial
Outcome
Application for termination of release on warning dismissed.
Judges
Molitsoane, AJ
Legal Topics
Release on Warning, Bail Cancellation, Interest of Justice, Failure to Disclose Previous Convictions
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Release on Warning Bail Cancellation Interest of Justice Failure to Disclose 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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

THE STATE

Applicant

MACEBO JOSEPH RABELE

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Law Application / Application for Termination of Release on Warning Pending Criminal Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused's release on warning should be terminated under section 72A of the Criminal Procedure Act.
  2. 2 Whether failure to disclose previous convictions during bail application justifies termination of release on warning.
  3. 3 Whether the accused poses a threat to public safety warranting termination of release on warning.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that although the accused did not disclose previous convictions for abduction and theft, these convictions were thirty-six and twenty-six years old, and the accused credibly asserted that he acted on legal advice not to disclose them. There was no evidence that the accused intended to mislead the court or evade justice. While the accused was arrested on other charges while released on warning, he had not been convicted of those offences and had attended court regularly. The interest of justice did not require termination of his release on warning, as there were no sufficient grounds to justify such an order under section 72A of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Court Disposition

Application for termination of release on warning dismissed.

Orders

  • The application by the State in terms of section 72A of the Criminal Procedure Act for termination of the release of the accused on warning is dismissed.