The two accused persons are jointly charged with the offence of murder
as defined in s 47 of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23]. More
The accused is facing a charge of murder as defined in s 47 of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23]. The allegations against him are that on 7 December 2010 at about 2100 hours and at Kandeya Township, Mount Darwin, the accused unlawfully caused the death of the now deceased Alex Jomboro by shooting him in the head intending to kill him or despite realizing that there was a real risk or possibility that his conduct might cause death continued to engage in the conduct. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and tendered a defence... More
This matter was referred to me by the scrutinising Senior Regional Magistrate for the Eastern Division who felt that it needed urgent attention as there was a likelihood of a grave injustice occurring given that the accused person had been given an unjustified term of imprisonment. More
The accused has been arraigned on a charge of the crime of conspiracy to commit murder as defined in section 188 (1) as read with Section 47 of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23] in that on the 30th day of May 2017 and at Dirozvi Meeting Place Lodges Chivhu the accused person unlawfully and intentionally entered into an agreement with Obert Juru for the killing of Makanaka Vhutani intending by the agreement to bring about the commission of murder or realising that there was a real risk or possibility that the agreement may bring about the... More
The record of this matter was referred to me with a note from the scrutinizing magistrate. The accused was arraigned before the court facing a charge of contravening section 29 (1) of the Medicines and Allied Substances Control Act [Chapter 15:03] as read with the nineth and tenth schedules of S I 100/1991. He was convicted on his own plea to possessing unregistered medicine. The Scrutinizing Magistrate queried the propriety of the charge and whether in view of the quantities involved possession would be inferred to be for purposes of personal use. The trial magistrates’ response was that the accused... More
