HH 316-18 LANGTON NDLOVU versus ISAAC MATSVIMBO and WRIGHT KUJOKA

LANGTON NDLOVU

versus

ISAAC MATSVIMBO

and

WRIGHT KUJOKA

 

 

 

HIGH COURT OF ZIMBABWE

CHIKOWERO J

HARARE, 6 June 2018

 

Opposed Matter

 

Advocate F Mahere with Ms N Karimatsenga, for the applicant

1st respondent in default

I Mataka, for the 2nd respondent

 

 

CHIKOWERO J: On 18 September 217 the applicant filed an application to register the restitution order made by the magistrate’s court sitting at Chegutu as a civil judgment of this court. The court a quo made the restitution order in terms of s 365 (1) of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act [Chapter 9:07].  That section reads:

“Subject to this part, a court which has convicted a person of an offence involving the         unlawful obtaining of property of any description may order the property to be            restored to        its owner or the person entitled to possess it.”

 

Respondents stood convicted of two counts. In count one (1) the charge was theft as defined in s 113 (1) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23]. Count two (2) was contravention of s 8 (3) of the Money Laundering and Proceeds of Crime Act [Chapter 9:24]. In a nutshell, the allegations were that they stole gold ore belonging to the applicant, sold it and bought four houses from the proceeds thereof.

At the material time they were employed by applicant at his two mines. They stole the ore from those mines. Upon sentencing the respondents on 8 August 2017 the following restitution order was then made;

“In addition, the 4 houses that is house number P486 Pfupajena Chegutu, P945         Pfupajena             Chegutu, 26479 Kaguvi 3 Chegutu and Number 1786 Waverly Kadoma are restored to         Langton Ndlovu who is entitled to possess them.”

 

                First respondent did not file any papers in opposition to the application. Second respondent did. The three points in limine he raised are the subject of this judgment. In his 

Download File: 

Tags: 

Year: 

2018