South Africa Case Law

S v Hlungwani (A154/2024)

S v Hlungwani (A154/2024) [2025] ZAGPPHC 645 (12 June 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A154/2024

Judges

SSE Sambo, MPN Mbongwe

The Court held that the Regional Court erred in granting a discharge under Section 174 of the Criminal Procedure Act, as the State had presented sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case of fraud and procurement irregularities. The unchallenged testimony regarding the backdating of the deviation letter and the misrepresentation to police officials required an answer from the accused. The Court further found that a purposive interpretation of the National Treasury Practice Note requires reasons for deviation to be approved before payment is made, and that personal benefit is not a ne…

Source excerpt

• Fraud
• Misrepresentation
• Procurement Irregularities
• Section 174 Discharge
• Interpretation Of Statutes

S v Msila and Others (Interim Ruling) (CC04/2024)

S v Msila and Others (Interim Ruling) (CC04/2024) [2025] ZAWCHC 244 (4 June 2025)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

CC04/2024

Judge

Wille

The court refused an accused’s section 174 discharge application at the close of the State case, finding the evidence sufficient to require the defence.

• Section 174 Discharge
• Prima Facie Evidence
• Credibility Assessment
• Fair Trial Rights
• Section-174-discharge
• Criminal-procedure

J.T v Regional Magistrate Somerset West and Another (16116/24)

J.T v Regional Magistrate Somerset West and Another (16116/24) [2025] ZAWCHC 122 (19 March 2025)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

16116/24

Judges

Wille, Lekhuleni

The High Court dismissed a review of a regional magistrate’s refusal to discharge an accused at the close of the prosecution case, finding the application premature.

• Section 174 Discharge
• Gross Irregularity
• Interlocutory Review
• Fair Trial Rights
• Section-174-discharge
• Criminal-review

S v Sodidi and Others (CC 9/2024)

S v Sodidi and Others (CC 9/2024) [2025] ZAECBHC 7 (14 March 2025)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Bhisho

Case number

CC 9/2024

Judge

Zono

The court found that the State had presented evidence from multiple witnesses establishing that the accused acted in concert and in furtherance of a common purpose in kidnapping, assaulting, and causing the death of the deceased. The evidence showed that the deceased was deprived of his liberty, physically controlled, and assaulted with hands, fists, feet, broomstick, and iron rod, resulting in fatal blunt trauma. The medical evidence corroborated the cause of death. The court held that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against all accused on all counts. At this stage, the cr…

Source excerpt

• Section 174 Discharge
• Common Purpose
• Kidnapping
• Assault With Intent To Do Grievous Bodily Harm
• Murder
• Prima Facie Case

S v Langa and Others (C 40/2020)

S v Langa and Others (C 40/2020) [2025] ZAGPPHC 303 (7 March 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

C 40/2020

Judge

Van Wyk

The High Court considered a section 174 discharge application in a multi-accused robbery case, assessing identification evidence, CCTV footage, and corroboration.

• Identification Evidence
• Section 174 Discharge
• Admissibility Of Real Evidence
• Single Witness Caution
• Common Purpose
• Joint Possession

S v Makhubo (37/2024)

S v Makhubo (37/2024) [2024] ZAFSHC 393 (18 November 2024)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

37/2024

Judge

Mahlatsi AJ

High Court decision on a section 174 discharge application: refused on murder and one attempted murder count, granted on the third count.

• Section 174 Discharge
• Murder
• Attempted Murder
• Criminal Procedure Act
• Credibility Of Witnesses
• Section-174-discharge

S v Nkuna (CC02/2023)

S v Nkuna (CC02/2023) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1050 (22 August 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

CC02/2023

Judge

PD. Phahlane

The court found that the State's case rested almost entirely on the evidence of Mr Mathunzi, who was a single witness and an accomplice. His evidence was marked by numerous contradictions, improbabilities, and inconsistencies, both internally and when compared to other witnesses and his own prior statements. The court held that his evidence was of such poor quality that it could not be safely relied upon. No credible evidence linked the accused to the offences charged, nor placed him at the relevant locations. The State failed to establish a prima facie case against the accused, and there was…

Source excerpt

• Section 174 Discharge
• Prima Facie Case
• Credibility Of Single Witness
• Accomplice Evidence
• Constitutional Right To Silence

S v Mokoane and Others (CC65/19)

S v Mokoane and Others (CC65/19) [2024] ZAGPPHC 679 (19 July 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

CC65/19

Judge

M A Lukhaimane

The High Court granted accused no. 5 a section 174 discharge after finding no admissible evidence linked him to the robberies, murders, or related charges.

• Section 174 Discharge
• Admissibility Of Confessions
• Burden Of Proof
• Acquittal Procedure
• Section-174-discharge
• Criminal-procedure-act

Kgatitswe v S (A42/2023)

Kgatitswe v S (A42/2023) [2024] ZAGPJHC 620 (5 July 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

A42/2023

Judges

Karam, Van Der Westhuizen

The High Court dismissed a criminal appeal against conviction for housebreaking with intent to rape and rape, finding the complainant credible and corroborated.

• Rape
• Housebreaking With Intent To Rape
• Single Witness Evidence
• Onus Of Proof
• Section 174 Discharge
• Credibility Of Witnesses

S v Montle and Others (SS80/2023)

S v Montle and Others (SS80/2023) [2024] ZAGPJHC 559 (11 June 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

SS80/2023

Judge

R Strydom

The court found that, at the close of the State's case, there was sufficient evidence implicating all seven accused in the murder counts, primarily through the testimony of Ms. Mosola, who identified the accused as part of the group that arrived at the dumpsite and participated in the shooting. The court accepted that, although the reliability of her identification was challenged due to her eyesight, her evidence was adequate for the purposes of a prima facie case at this stage. The doctrine of common purpose was applicable, as the accused acted together in furtherance of the offences. Howeve…

Source excerpt

• Section 174 Discharge
• Common Purpose
• Murder
• Attempted Murder
• Identification Evidence