S v Shoshera and 4 Others (103 of 2022) [2022] ZWBHC 103 (31 March 2022)

S v Shoshera and 4 Others (103 of 2022) [2022] ZWBHC 103 (31 March 2022)

The state failed to provide substantiated and compelling reasons to justify continued detention of the applicants. The presumption of innocence and the absence of evidence of risk of abscondment or interference with justice require the court to grant bail.

Citation
[2022] ZWBHC 103
Parties
Applicant: Edmore Shoshera; Applicant: Albert Maketo Tembo; Applicant: Percy Mukwaturi; Applicant: Talent Imbayago; Applicant: Panashe Makuva; Respondent: The State
Court
Bulawayo High Court
Jurisdiction
Zimbabwe
Judgment Date
31 March 2022
Case Number
103 of 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Bail Application Pending Trial
Outcome
bail granted
Legal Topics
Bail, Presumption of Innocence, Public Violence, Murder
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Bail Presumption of Innocence Public Violence Murder

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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Edmore Shoshera

Applicant

Albert Maketo Tembo

Applicant

Percy Mukwaturi

Applicant

Talent Imbayago

Applicant

Panashe Makuva

Applicant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Bail Application Pending Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants are entitled to bail pending trial
  2. 2 Whether the state has provided compelling reasons to justify continued detention

Ratio Decidendi

The state failed to provide substantiated and compelling reasons to justify continued detention of the applicants. The presumption of innocence and the absence of evidence of risk of abscondment or interference with justice require the court to grant bail.

Court Disposition

bail granted

Orders

  • The application for bail is granted in terms of the draft order.