S v Sehume (15/2001) [2001] ZANWHC 10 (1 March 2001)

S v Sehume (15/2001) [2001] ZANWHC 10 (1 March 2001)

The reviewing judge found that the conviction was based on an interim protection order that was no longer operative at the time of the alleged violation. The correct operative order was the final protection order issued on 15 September 2000, and only its conditions could be violated. The charge sheet and record were disordered and failed to reflect the correct offence and conditions. The magistrate incorrectly referenced non-existent sections of the Domestic Violence Act and failed to ensure procedural accuracy. Nevertheless, the accused was correctly convicted for threatening Regina Sehume with a knife, which contravened the operative protection order. The sentence imposed was...

Citation
[2001] ZANWHC 10
Parties
Applicant: The State; Respondent: Koketso Sehume
Court
North West High Court, Mafikeng
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
1 March 2001
Case Number
15/2001
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Review Judgment
Outcome
Conviction and sentence corrected to reflect violation of the protection order in contravention of section 17 read with section 1 of the Domestic Violence Act No. 116 of 1998. Sentence confirmed as R600.00 or 6 months imprisonment.
Judges
M.T.R. Mogoeng, M.M. Leewu
Legal Topics
Domestic Violence Act, Protection Order Violation, Sentencing, Record Management
Criminal Law Family and Children Domestic Violence Act Protection Order Violation Sentencing Record Management

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The State

Applicant

Koketso Sehume

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Review Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused was properly convicted for violation of a protection order under section 17 of the Domestic Violence Act.
  2. 2 Whether the charge sheet and record reflected the correct operative protection order and conditions.
  3. 3 Whether the conviction and sentence were legally sound given the procedural irregularities.

Ratio Decidendi

The reviewing judge found that the conviction was based on an interim protection order that was no longer operative at the time of the alleged violation. The correct operative order was the final protection order issued on 15 September 2000, and only its conditions could be violated. The charge sheet and record were disordered and failed to reflect the correct offence and conditions. The magistrate incorrectly referenced non-existent sections of the Domestic Violence Act and failed to ensure procedural accuracy. Nevertheless, the accused was correctly convicted for threatening Regina Sehume with a knife, which contravened the operative protection order. The sentence imposed was...

Court Disposition

Conviction and sentence corrected to reflect violation of the protection order in contravention of section 17 read with section 1 of the Domestic Violence Act No. 116 of 1998. Sentence confirmed as R600.00 or 6 months imprisonment.

Orders

  • Conviction corrected to: Guilty of violation of the protection order in contravention of section 17 read with section 1 of the Domestic Violence Act No. 116 of 1998.
  • Sentence confirmed: R600.00 or 6 months imprisonment.