Seven accused were charged in the regional court, Pretoria, with 399 counts including fraud, forgery, uttering and corruption arising from an alleged fraudulent scheme to sell properties belonging to the Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality through forged documents and bribery of officials. The first appellant, an attorney, was alleged to have devised and orchestrated the scheme and was charged with most counts except corruption. The second appellant, an employee of the City of Johannesburg, was charged with 34 fraud counts linked to confirming the legitimacy and rezoning of certain properties. Before pleading, the appellants objected to being tried jointly with their co-accused, arguing that sections 155 and 156 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 did not permit joinder where all accused did not face the same charges. The magistrate and the High Court dismissed the objection, and the matter came before the Supreme Court of Appeal.
The appeal was dismissed and the refusal to order separation of trials was upheld.
The case clarifies that under South African criminal procedure, accused persons may be tried together even if they do not face identical charges, provided the offences arise from a common purpose or closely connected conduct. It reinforces the discretionary nature of separation of trials and affirms the principle that avoidance of multiple trials is in the interests of justice.