Online Reporter
Fidelis Munyoro-Chief Court Reporter
AN attempt by two accused persons to secure an acquittal in their fraud trial has failed as the High Court dismissed their application to review a magistrate’s decision to put them to their defence.
Justice Joel Mambara ruled that the prosecution had established a prima facie case, requiring Leon Zvarevashe and Nyasha Mhuru to respond to allegations of misleading a homeowner into signing away her property under the guise of a loan agreement.
The case centres around a February 2023 transaction involving Ms Debra Mullin, who claims she was tricked into selling her house in Hillside, Harare, valued at US$250 000, for US$30 000.
Ms Mullin alleges the accused misrepresented the nature of the agreement she signed, believing it was a loan contract.
The State closed its case after presenting testimony from Ms Mullin, her daughter, and other witnesses, along with documents and an audio recording of the meeting where the transaction occurred.
Zvarevashe and Mhuru sought a discharge under Section 198(3) of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act, arguing the State had failed to prove its case.
The magistrate dismissed their discharge application, stating there was evidence connecting the accused to the alleged fraud.
Dissatisfied, the accused approached the High Court, claiming gross misdirection and irregularities in the magistrate’s ruling.
Justice Mambara, however, found the magistrate’s decision sound and in line with the law.
“The test is whether there is evidence upon which a reasonable court might convict. If such evidence exists, the accused must be placed on their defence,” he said.
The judge acknowledged the magistrate’s flawed reference to “exceptional cases” during her ruling but noted it did not invalidate the decision.
“While the wording was unfortunate, the magistrate’s conclusion aligned with the substance of the law. The State’s evidence, if believed, provided a basis for conviction,” he stated.
The judge emphasised the complainant’s testimony, supported by documents and the circumstances of the transaction, as sufficient to warrant the continuation of the trial.
He dismissed the accused’s argument that the evidence was unreliable or inadmissible, noting that disputes over credibility and the authenticity of an audio recording could be addressed during the defence.
Justice Mambara also declined to intervene in the ongoing proceedings, emphasising that higher courts should interfere with unfinished trials only in exceptional circumstances.
