adminfor today.
Joyce Mukazhi (33), a director of Tromage Enterprises, is being charged with theft of trust property.
Both the defence and State have filed their closing submissions.
Mr David Magwegwe is appearing for the State while Mr Admire Rubaya is representing Mukazhi.
Mr Rubaya submitted that Mukazhi could not be held liable criminally in her personal capacity as she acted as a representative of the company.
He said the company should be held responsible.
“The State failed to prove that the accused who was one of the directors of Tromage Enterprises (Pvt) Limited during the relevant time, committed the offence of theft of trust property in her personal capacity.
“The State just charged the accused in terms of contravening section 113(2)(a) without any reference to section 277 of the Criminal Law Codification and Reform Act.
“. . . If there was anything wrong or criminal done during the process of executing the agreement which is not conceded, the best person to have been charged was Tromage Enterprises,” reads part of the defence submissions.
Mr Magwegwe argued that the code provides that a person, who is criminally liable for any conduct, constituting a crime for which a corporate body may be liable shall be liable to be prosecuted and punished personally for the crime concerned.
“. . . Provisions cited above in section 385(2) and (6) provide for where a company is charged and where directors and employees may be charged personally or jointly with the corporate body.
“It is again the State’s considered view that in terms of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act, the criminal allegations have been properly brought against the accused in her personal capacity.
“Furthermore in the transaction involving the complainant (Cashington Mavhunduke), it is the accused who dealt with the complainant from the onset . . . it is the accused who signed the agreement with the complainant . . .
“It is the accused who lied to the complainant that she would personally go to buy the vehicle in Japan,” he said.
Mr Magwegwe further said it was the accused who assured the complainant that she had bought his vehicle and that it was to be delivered as per the agreed date.
Magistrate Mr Shane Kubonera is expected to pass the judgement today.
Charges against Mukazhi arose sometime in October last year, when Mukazhi’s company placed an advert in the local newspapers urging members of the public to purchase cars from Japan through her company.
On November 3, the State says, Mavhunduke responded to the advert and proceeded to Mukazhi’s work place where he met her.
She allegedly informed him that she was about to leave the country for Japan to buy vehicles for other customers.
It is the State’s case that Mukazhi told Mavhunduke she had a licence, which allowed her to buy vehicles at auctions in Japan at lower prices.
Mavhunduke, however, told Mukazhi that he wanted her to bring him a Toyota Prado.
He was allegedly advised that such vehicles would cost US$26 500 inclusive of freight charges to Harare.
The two then allegedly agreed on the purchase price and Mavhunduke was ordered to deposit the money into Mukazhi’s Standard Bank account and he complied. Mavhunduke, the State says, was told that his car would be delivered to him before December 20 last year.
The court heard that after the agreement had lapsed, Mavhunduke on several occasions confronted Mukazhi demanding his car but she became evasive.
This prompted Mavhunduke to make a police report that led to her arrest.
Online Reporter