Danisa Masuku, Court Reporter
THREE Bulawayo men accused of breaking into Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) offices in Thorngrove and unlawfully possessing a firearm have been acquitted after the court found that the State had failed to establish a case against them.
Gift Mwale, Witness Hlongwane and Wellington Mthunzi appeared before Bulawayo provincial magistrate Mr Themba Chimiso on Thursday, where they were discharged at the close of the State’s case.
The trio was represented by Mr Simbarashe Innocent Madzivire of Mashayamombe Law Firm.
They were facing two counts: unlawful entry into premises in aggravating circumstances, as defined in Section 131(1) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act (Chapter 9:23), and possession of a firearm or ammunition without a firearm certificate, in contravention of the Firearms Act (Chapter 10:09).
The State alleged that on August 14, 2025, the three men, acting in connivance, unlawfully entered the SPCA premises at Number 8 Magazine Road, Thorngrove, Bulawayo, without the permission of the organisation’s lawful occupier, Mr Maxwell Tasa.
They allegedly broke the padlock securing the main entrance gate, smashed a window pane and cut through a burglar bar to gain entry into the offices, where they were accused of committing theft.
At the close of the State’s case, Mr Madzivire applied for the trio’s discharge in terms of Section 198(3) of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act (Chapter 9:07), arguing that the prosecution had failed to present sufficient and reliable evidence to warrant placing them on their defence.
He submitted that none of the State witnesses had positively identified any of the accused at the scene, arguing that the prosecution had relied on circumstantial evidence that failed to link them to the alleged offences. “The State relied on circumstantial evidence which did not connect the trio to the crime,” argued Mr Madzivire.
He also highlighted what he described as material contradictions in the State witnesses’ testimonies regarding the time of the alleged offence, how entry had been gained and what, if anything, had been stolen.
On the firearm charge, Mr Madzivire argued that no firearm or ammunition had been recovered from any of the accused.
He further submitted that the State had neither produced evidence establishing the absence of a valid firearm certificate nor presented ballistic evidence linking his clients to any weapon.
Prosecutor Mr Samuel Mpofu opposed the application, arguing that the State had established a prima facie case and that the accused should be placed on their defence.
Continues on www.chronicle.co.zw
However, Mr Chimiso upheld the defence application, finding that the prosecution had failed to establish essential elements of the two offences.
The magistrate noted that the evidence did not establish that the accused had acted with a common purpose, as alleged, while the identification evidence was weak and inconsistent.
The court also found that the State had failed to establish that the entry was unauthorised and had not adequately proved the circumstances surrounding the alleged break-in.
Mr Chimiso consequently ruled that no reasonable court, acting carefully, could convict the accused on the evidence presented.
Mwale, Hlongwane and Mthunzi were therefore discharged and acquitted at the close of the State’s case.
Ends/
