Rasengani v The State

The appellant was convicted in the Thihoyandou High Court of murder, two counts of attempted murder, pointing a firearm, and possession of an unlicensed firearm, arising from a violent incident on 13 July 1999. After the end of a romantic relationship, the appellant went to the home of the deceased, shot and killed him, shot and seriously injured the complainant (his former partner), threatened and shot at a police officer, and attempted suicide. Evidence indicated that the appellant was suffering from depression, emotional distress, and had been treated with antidepressant medication prior to the offences. Four psychiatrists had examined him for purposes of fitness to stand trial and criminal capacity, but no psychiatric evidence was led at sentencing to address his emotional state or its relevance to sentence.

All sentences imposed by the trial court were set aside, and the matter was remitted to the trial court for the hearing of further evidence, including psychiatric evidence, and for sentence to be imposed afresh on all counts.

This case is significant for clarifying that sentencing courts have an active duty to ensure that all relevant evidence is before them, especially when considering prescribed minimum sentences. It emphasises that courts should not pass sentence mechanically but must investigate potential substantial and compelling circumstances, including mental and emotional factors, even if not fully canvassed by the parties.