S v Ncube and Ors (HC 1780 of 2002) [2002] ZWBHC 950 (31 July 2002)

S v Ncube and Ors (HC 1780 of 2002) [2002] ZWBHC 950 (31 July 2002)

The state is only required to demonstrate that on the facts alleged a reasonable suspicion arises that an offence has been committed. The admissibility of evidence, such as confessions by co-accused, is not determined at this stage but at trial. The application to remove the applicants from remand and strike off the indictment cannot succeed as the threshold for reasonable suspicion has been met.

Citation
[2002] ZWBHC 950
Parties
Applicant: Fletcher Dulini Ncube; Applicant: Sony Nicholas Masara; Applicant: Army Zulu; Respondent: The State
Court
Bulawayo High Court
Jurisdiction
Zimbabwe
Judgment Date
31 July 2002
Case Number
HC 1780 of 2002
Procedural Posture
Chamber Application (criminal) / Ruling on Confirmation of Provisional Order
Outcome
provisional order discharged with costs
Legal Topics
Remand, Indictment, Reasonable Suspicion, Powers of Attorney General, Admissibility of Evidence
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Remand Indictment Reasonable Suspicion Powers of Attorney General Admissibility of Evidence

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fletcher Dulini Ncube

Applicant

Sony Nicholas Masara

Applicant

Army Zulu

Applicant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Chamber Application (criminal) / Ruling on Confirmation of Provisional Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants should be removed from remand and the indictment struck off for lack of reasonable suspicion
  2. 2 Whether the Attorney-General's power to indict is subject to judicial review at this stage
  3. 3 Whether confessions by co-accused are admissible for purposes of establishing reasonable suspicion

Ratio Decidendi

The state is only required to demonstrate that on the facts alleged a reasonable suspicion arises that an offence has been committed. The admissibility of evidence, such as confessions by co-accused, is not determined at this stage but at trial. The application to remove the applicants from remand and strike off the indictment cannot succeed as the threshold for reasonable suspicion has been met.

Court Disposition

provisional order discharged with costs

Orders

  • The provisional order is discharged with costs.