Sagren Perumal and Others v The National Director of Public Prosecutions

The NDPP obtained an ex parte preservation order under s 38 of the Prevention of Organised Crime Act 121 of 1998 (POCA) over extensive movable and immovable property allegedly linked to the first appellant, Sagren Perumal, whom the NDPP alleged to be a major drug dealer. The property, registered in the names of various family members, was said to be either the proceeds of unlawful activities or instrumentalities of crime. A subsequent forfeiture application under s 48 of POCA was granted by the KwaZulu-Natal High Court. On appeal, the NDPP abandoned part of the forfeiture, limiting the dispute to the Kings Avenue house, a truck, a truck trailer, and a motor vehicle. No criminal convictions or pending prosecutions existed against the first appellant. The NDPP relied primarily on affidavit evidence from investigators and informants alleging long-standing drug dealing activities by the first appellant.

The appeal was upheld with costs. The forfeiture order of the KwaZulu-Natal High Court was set aside and replaced with an order dismissing the forfeiture application with costs.

The case reinforces the evidentiary burden resting on the NDPP in civil forfeiture proceedings under POCA and underscores that suspicion, untested hearsay, and poorly substantiated affidavits are insufficient to justify forfeiture. It affirms the application of the Plascon-Evans rule in POCA matters and serves as a caution against overreliance on inferential and speculative evidence in asset forfeiture cases.