Criminal law

Fako v The Director of Public Prosecution (CRI/T/0004/18) [2020] LSHC 19 (21 January 2020);

Share
Flynote: 
Search Summary: 

          “Four things belong to a judge: to hear courteously, to answer wisely, to consider soberly and to decide impartially”. This is an application for my recusal. Every recusal application seeks to challenge this statement as it aims to demonstrate that as a matter of fact, there exists a perception that the judge under scrutiny will not be impartial in the matter before him.

In approaching this application, I bear in mind what was stated in Moch v Nedtravel (Pty) Ltd t/a American Express, namely that "a judicial officer should not be unduly sensitive and ought not to regard an application for his recusal as a personal affront."

This is an interlocutory application in the main criminal trial in which the applicants are part of the accused facing several criminal charges in respect of which they all pleaded not guilty. The present applicants seek an order, among others, that I recuse myself from presiding in the main matter.

Quoted, among many places,  in Lazarus, In Memory of Charles O’Neill, 219 La, xxxix (1951); Yankwich, The Art of Being a Judge, 105 U. Pa L. Rev 374, 385 (1957).

1996 (3) SA 1 (A) at 13H

CRI/T/0004/18

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

 

HELD AT MASERU                                                                      

 

In the matter between:

 

MOTSAMAI FAKO                                                                                     1st APPLICANT

MOTSOANE MACHAI                                                                               2nd APPLICANT

Rex v Kulehile (CRI/T/40/07) [2018] LSHC 33 (07 May 2018);

Share
Flynote: 
Search Summary: 

The accused is charged with murder and the unlawful possession of a firearm in contravention of section 3 (2) (a) of the internal security Act as amended by Act N04 of 1999. It is alleged on the count of murder that on or about the 27th October 2006 he acting unlawfully and with intent to kill shot Tsoarelo Phehlane (hereafter referred to as deceased) and inflicted upon him a gun-shot wound from which he died at Mafeteng Hospital on the 20th November 2006. On the second count it is alleged that he had in his possession a firearm, to wit, a 7.65 calibre pistol of serial number BB/2004 with six rounds of ammunition without a firearm certificate in force at the time.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

 

                                                                   CR/T/40/2007

 

In the matter between:

REX                                                                              Crown

V

MOSALETSANE KULEHILE                                     Accused

 

JUDGMENT

 

Coram                     :The Hon. T. Nomngcongo

Rex v Khotso (CRI/T/125/13) [2019] LSHC 36 (05 February 2019);

Share
Flynote: 
Search Summary: 

The accused is charged with murder. It is alleged that upon or about the 17th day of February 2012 and at or near Ha Morolong in the district of Berea. The accused did unlawfully and intentionally kill one Nts’iuoa Mohlaoli Mosobela (herein after referred to as deceased).

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

 

                                                                                      CRI/T/125/13

 

In the matter between:

 

REX                                                                              CROWN

 

AND

 

LEHLOHONOLO KHOTSO                                 ACCUSED

 

Coram :                Nomngcongo J

Rex v Thai (CRI/T/34/05) [2017] LSHC 36 (12 December 2017);

Share
Flynote: 
Search Summary: 

Criminal law – charges of murder and attempted murder – accused having pleaded not guilty to both charges – the defence being that of alibi – cross-examination on crown witnesses having been suggestive of the presence of accused at the scene of crime – This line of cross-examination by the accused having been in sharp contradistinction to his defence of alibi – circumstantial evidence leading to the exclusive inference that accused is the culprit.

Held:

The accused is found guilty as charged.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

 

HELD AT MASERU                                                                     CRI/T/34/05

 

In the matter between

 

REX                                                                                                                                    

 

AND

 

LEKHOOA THAI                                                                        ACCUSED

 

 

Khetsi v Director of Public Prosecutions (CRI/T/0079/14) [2017] LSHC 35 (24 November 2017);

Share
Flynote: 
Search Summary: 

Criminal Law – application to dismiss charges for want of prosecution-Crown having failed to prosecute its case within time prescribed under Speedy Court Trials Act – The Act affording the charged person the right to apply for dismissal of indictment where the Crown has failed to comply with its provisions – Crown having resisted the application.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

(HELD AT MASERU)

CRI/T/0079/2014

In the matter between;

 

RETS’ELISITSOE KHETSI                                          APPLICANT

 

AND

 

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS           1ST RESPONDENT

DIRECTORATE OF CORRUPTION AND

ECONOMIC OFFENCES                                     2ND RESPONDENT

Masilo v Rex (CRI/A/0008/17) [2018] LSHC 29 (30 August 2018);

Share
Flynote: 
Search Summary: 
  1. This is an appeal against a criminal conviction and sentence imposed upon the Appellant by a Magistrate of a Senior Magistrate Jurisdiction in the district of Maseru.  the trial proceedings were in consequence of the criminal charge which the Crown had preferred against him in that he had contravened Section 83 (1)(a) and (b) No. 8 of 2010.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

HELD AT MASERU

                                                                                                CR/1052/13

                                                                                                    CRI/A/0008/17

In the matter between;

 

THABANG MASILO                                                                   APPEALLANT

And

Moholobela v Director of Public Prosecution (CRI/T/0150/18) [2018] LSHC 27 (16 April 2018);

Share
Flynote: 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

(HELD AT MASERU)

CRI/T/0150/2018

In the matter between;

 

SELE MOHOLOBELA                                        1ST APPLICANT

SENGAPHA KOLOTSANE                                   2NDAPPLICANT

 

AND

 

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS             RESPONDENT

 

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Mosooane v Mrs Letsika-The Magistrate (CIV/APN/201/19) [2019] LSHC 34 (22 June 2019);

Share
Search Summary: 

The Applicant wrongly approached this Court praying that it sets aside a sentence imposed by the Court of first incidence instead of appealing against the sentence – application resultantly dismissed without an order on costs.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

(HELD AT MASERU)

 

 

                                                      CIV/APN/201/2019

In the matter between:

 

PINKIE MOSOOANE                                                                       APPLICANT

 

And

 

MRS. LETSIKA - THE MAGISTRATE                                  1ST RESPONDENT

Mosooane v His Worship Magistrate Hlabanyane (CRI/REV/0042/17) [2018] LSHC 24 (20 March 2018);

Share
Flynote: 
Search Summary: 

Application for review – Magistrate Court having found applicant guilty of occupying land unlawfully – the Accused having not challenged the finding of guilty on his part but the sending of the matter to the High Court for automatic review and the Magistrate to have revisited his earlier order following an order on automatic review – Magistrate Court having ordered D010 and or the chief to take appropriate action they may deem fit about the accused on the basis of his conviction – The Magistrate Court having sent the matter to the High Court for automatic review following its recognition that its order was inaccurate – High Court having ordered the Magistrate Court to make an appropriate order – Magistrate Court having made an order of vacation and demolition of the structures of the applicant.

 

 

 

 

Held:

There is nothing procedurally wrong with the conduct of the proceedings in the court a quo.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

(HELD AT MASERU)

 

CRI/REV/0042/2017

In the matter between;

 

SEENYANE MOSOOANE                                         APPLICANT

 

AND

 

HIS WORSHIP MAGISTRATE HLABANYANE  1ST RESPONDENT

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS       2ND RESPONDENT

SENIOR CLERK OF COURT -

Mohale V Crown (CRI/A/0009/17) [2018] LSHC 23 (03 September 2018);

Share
Flynote: 
Search Summary: 

Appeal from the Magistrate Court- Appellants having applied for an appeal of a land matter to the High Court sitting in its ordinary jusrisdiction. The court raising the issue of jurisdiction mero muto.

Held: The High Court sitting in its ordinary jurisdiction declines to hear the matter.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

HELD AT MASERU

                                                                                            CRI/A/0009/2017

 CRI/T/MSU/0469/14

In the matter between:

 

MALEBONA MOHALE                                                               1st APPELLANT

NKHAHLE MOHALE                                                                 2nd APPELLANT

 

AND

Pages