S v Seema and Another (REV32/2022) [2022] ZALMPPHC 39 (19 July 2022)

S v Seema and Another (REV32/2022) [2022] ZALMPPHC 39 (19 July 2022)

The court held that section 105 of the Criminal Procedure Act is peremptory, requiring the accused to plead to all charges before any evidence is led. In this case, the accused pleaded only to count 1, and evidence was led before they pleaded to count 2. The oversight cannot be rectified by recording a plea after evidence has commenced, nor can the magistrate simply proceed with count 1 and later try count 2 separately, as this would be prejudicial and costly. The proceedings were not in accordance with justice and must be set aside. The matter is remitted for a trial de novo before another magistrate should the prosecution wish to pursue it.

Citation
[2022] ZALMPPHC 39
Parties
Applicant: The State; Respondent: Routly Matome Seema; Respondent: Sammyson Mapesa Sekwala
Court
Limpopo High Court, Polokwane
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
19 July 2022
Case Number
REV32/2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Review / Special Review After Commencement of Trial
Outcome
Proceedings reviewed and set aside; matter remitted for trial de novo before another magistrate.
Judges
Kganyago, Naude-Odendaal
Legal Topics
Criminal Procedure Act Section 105, Plea Process, Trial Commencement, De Novo Trial
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Criminal Procedure Act Section 105 Plea Process Trial Commencement De Novo Trial

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The State

Applicant

Routly Matome Seema

Respondent

Sammyson Mapesa Sekwala

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Review / Special Review After Commencement of Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the failure to require the accused to plead to count 2 before evidence was led invalidates the proceedings.
  2. 2 Whether the magistrate can rectify the oversight by recording a plea after evidence has commenced.
  3. 3 Whether the proceedings should be set aside and the matter tried de novo.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that section 105 of the Criminal Procedure Act is peremptory, requiring the accused to plead to all charges before any evidence is led. In this case, the accused pleaded only to count 1, and evidence was led before they pleaded to count 2. The oversight cannot be rectified by recording a plea after evidence has commenced, nor can the magistrate simply proceed with count 1 and later try count 2 separately, as this would be prejudicial and costly. The proceedings were not in accordance with justice and must be set aside. The matter is remitted for a trial de novo before another magistrate should the prosecution wish to pursue it.

Court Disposition

Proceedings reviewed and set aside; matter remitted for trial de novo before another magistrate.

Orders

  • The proceedings in this matter are reviewed and set aside.
  • The matter is remitted back to the regional court for a trial de novo before another magistrate should the prosecution still wish to pursue the matter.