THE STATE
versus
PANASHE TAGWIREYI
HIGH COURT OF ZIMBABWE
NDEWERE & CHITAPI JJ
HARARE, 30 January, 2018
Review judgment
CHITAPI J: The record in this matter was first placed before me on review on 23 September, 2016. I addressed a query to the magistrate who convicted the accused person. I reproduce the query hereunder.
“REVIEW MINUTE: THE STATE v PANASHE TAGWIREYI CRB MSVP 1236- 28/16
I refer to the above record where there is only one summary jurisdiction sheet being the charge sheet enclosed therein. It reflects count 1 but at the back of this form the magistrate endorsed that “accused pleaded all 3 counts 20/07/16.” There is no charge sheet for counts 2 and 3. How was this dealt with?
Apart from the charge to which the accused pleaded showing the date of commission of the offence as 3 June, 2016, while the state outline indicates 4 April 2016, the accused is alleged to have broken into a co-owned premises and made away with goods from the common premises. If this was the case, on what basis is the accused charged and convicted of 3 counts of unlawful entry?
Does the magistrate not agree that the facts reveal one count of unlawful entry and that the accused having unlawfully entered the premises stole property which turned out to belong to different people.
Do the essential elements canvassed as pertaining to counts 2 and 3 not relate to a contravention of s 113 of the Criminal Code [theft] as opposed to the charge for which the accused was convicted of and consequently sentenced.
As this review has delayed in its completion, may the magistrate respond by 17th October, 2016.”
