Online Reporter
Yeukai Karengezeka-Chisepo-Court Correspondent
THE State has strongly opposed bail for suspected car dealer Hazel Mafu, arguing that she is likely to interfere with witnesses, obstruct the course of justice and abscond if released.
Lead investigating officer Detective Sergeant Richard Maravanyika told Harare regional magistrate Mrs Jesse Kufa that Mafu, the director of Hezy Motors Logistics, had been reaching out to complainants even while she was being sought by police, allegedly discouraging them from pursuing criminal charges.
Det Sgt Maravanyika said several complainants reported that Mafu had told them they would not receive their vehicles as long as the matter remained under police investigation.
“In some instances, the accused promised to refund clients as a way of delaying the criminal proceedings,” he told the court.
The detective produced correspondence allegedly showing a refund settlement plan dated April 20, 2026, between complainant Charles Tatenda Mademutsa and the finance department of Hezy Motors Logistics, in which the company proposed to refund US$4 000.
The court heard that on February 13, 2026, while police were looking for Mafu, four of her employees appeared in court facing fraud charges, but she remained at large.
Det Sgt Maravanyika said that despite court orders directing those involved not to interfere with witnesses, correspondence with complainants allegedly continued.
He further told the court that another pending case involving the company concerns allegations of obstructing the course of justice.
The investigating officer also alleged that police obtained a search-and-seizure warrant to recover evidence from Hezy Motors Logistics’ offices in Milton Park.
However, when detectives arrived at the premises, they allegedly intercepted a vehicle carrying electronic gadgets that they intended to seize. Investigations allegedly revealed that Mafu had instructed that the equipment be removed from the offices before the police search.
“This demonstrates her propensity to interfere with investigations and conceal evidence,” Det Sgt Maravanyika submitted.
The State also produced Mafu’s travel history from the Department of Immigration, which allegedly showed that she left Zimbabwe through Robert Gabriel Mugabe International Airport on March 19, 2026.
The investigating officer said this was after police had begun searching for her following the arrest of her employees.
He further told the court that there is no official record indicating how Mafu re-entered Zimbabwe before she later presented herself to police in the company of her lawyer.
Det Sgt Maravanyika also informed the court that two warrants of arrest had been issued against Mafu on May 14 and July 14 this year after she failed to appear before the courts.
He argued that public confidence in the justice system could be undermined if Mafu is granted bail, given the number of complainants involved and the seriousness of the allegations.
The State maintains that Mafu poses a significant flight risk and is likely to interfere with witnesses and ongoing investigations if released.
The bail application is expected to continue today with the cross-examination of the witness by defence counsel Mr Editor Mavuto.
Prosecutor Mr Lawrence Gangarahwe alleges that between 2022 and the present, Mafu advertised vehicle importation services through various platforms, including social media, as well as electronic and print media.
The State alleges that Mafu represented to members of the public that she had the capacity to source and import motor vehicles within agreed timeframes at competitive prices.
Believing the representations to be genuine, numerous complainants allegedly paid varying amounts to Mafu for the purchase and importation of vehicles.
It is alleged that after receiving the money, Mafu failed to deliver the vehicles as agreed.
The State further alleges that Mafu falsely represented that she was able and willing to supply the vehicles when, in fact, she had no intention or capacity to fulfil the orders, thereby inducing clients to part with their money.
According to the prosecution, the total prejudice amounts to US$624 958,96 and ZiG1 275 878,35.
