S v Madungwe (B 1226 of 2016; HH 76 of 2017) [2016] ZWHHC 760 (9 December 2016)

S v Madungwe (B 1226 of 2016; HH 76 of 2017) [2016] ZWHHC 760 (9 December 2016)

Bail was denied because the evidence against the applicant in the Kadoma case was strong, a conviction was likely, and the seriousness of the offences and likelihood of a long custodial sentence created a high risk of abscondment. The applicant failed to discharge the onus to show that the interests of justice would be served by granting bail.

Citation
[2016] ZWHHC 760
Parties
Applicant: Benjamin Madungwe; Respondent: The State
Court
Harare High Court
Jurisdiction
Zimbabwe
Judgment Date
9 December 2016
Case Number
B 1226 of 2016 ; HH 76 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Bail Application Pending Trial
Outcome
Bail denied
Legal Topics
Bail, Armed Robbery, Unlawful Possession of Firearm, Unlawful Entry
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Bail Armed Robbery Unlawful Possession of Firearm Unlawful Entry

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

Parties

Benjamin Madungwe

Applicant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Bail Application Pending Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should be granted bail pending trial given the seriousness of the charges and strength of evidence against him.

Ratio Decidendi

Bail was denied because the evidence against the applicant in the Kadoma case was strong, a conviction was likely, and the seriousness of the offences and likelihood of a long custodial sentence created a high risk of abscondment. The applicant failed to discharge the onus to show that the interests of justice would be served by granting bail.

Court Disposition

Bail denied

Orders

  • Applicant to remain in custody pending trial