NDOU J: This
is an application for bail pending trial.
The sole ground of opposition of this application is abscondment. The background facts are the following. On 2 July 2009, the applicants, acting in common
purpose, connived to rob the complainant Simeoni Takaruza of gold ore at West
Court Mine, Kwekwe. The first three
applicants are employed by the Zimbabwe Republic Police. The other two applicants were employed by the
complainant at the time of the offence.
The applicants drove to the said mine in police coloured vehicle, a
Mazda B1800 bearing registration number ZRP 3120M. The applicants threatened to arrest the
complainant for allegedly failing to produce mine documents. They demanded one tonne of gold ore in order
for them to drop the alleged charges against the complainant. The complainant stood his ground. The applicants ordered mine workers to load
gold ore into the police vehicle using some sacks and tins. The workers obliged and loaded one tonne of
gold ore into the police vehicle and the applicants departed with their
loot. The respondent premises its case
of likelihood of abscondment on the fact that two of the applicants employed by
complainant will lose employment and they will be induced to abscond. It is not clear, from respondent's papers,
how this factor will affect the first three applicants who are policemen. It is trite that persons jointly charged with
an offence must be treated in the same way unless there are factors personal or
related to the offence which suggest otherwise – S v Ruturi (2) 2003(1)
ZLR 537 (H) at 544C-D. There is no
justification to treat the applicants differently in casu. The respondent has
failed to adduce cognizable indications that the applicants will be tempted to
abscond. Admittedly, the offence is
serious, but when one balances the interests of the administration of justice
and the interests of the applicants, I hold the view that the applicants are
suitable candidates for bail – S v Biti 2002(1) ZLR 115 (H) and S v Ndlovu
2001(2) ZLR 261(H). The applicants have
strong family ties. Some of the grounds
for opposing bail advanced by the investigating officer, Detective Inspector
Mukahwa, do not suffice legally for the purposes of denying the applicants
their liberty.
Accordingly, it is ordered that:
1.
Applicants
be and are hereby admitted to bail in the sum of US$70 each to be deposited
with the Clerk of Court, Kwekwe Magistrates' Court.
2.
Applicants
to continue residing at: 1st and 2nd applicant's at ZRP
Police Mbizo residential camp, Kwekwe, 3rd applicant at 15023/15
Mbizo, Kwekwe, 4th applicant at 344/1 Mbizo, Kwekwe and the 5th
applicant at 214/6 Mbizo, Kwekwe until finalization of this matter.
3.
Applicants
shall not interfere with state witnesses until this matter is finalized.
Magodora & Partners c/o Mabhikwa, Hikwa &
Nyathi, applicants' legal
practitioners
Criminal Division, Attorney General's Office,
respondent's legal practitioners
