Jiyane v The State

The appellant was charged in the Magistrates’ Court, Daveyton, with robbery read with s 51 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 105 of 1997. It was alleged that he assaulted the complainant, Mr John Malinga, with a sjambok and a knobkierie and took his cellular phone and R1000 on 24 August 2014. The complainant sustained serious injuries, including fractures to his wrist and leg, and was hospitalised for approximately ten weeks. The appellant admitted assaulting the complainant but denied taking his property, contending that the complainant was an intruder and was assaulted by members of the community. He was convicted of robbery and sentenced to three years’ imprisonment. His appeal to the High Court was dismissed, and he appealed further to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The appeal against conviction and sentence succeeded. The robbery conviction and three-year imprisonment sentence were set aside and replaced with a conviction for assault with intent to do grievous bodily harm and a sentence of three years’ imprisonment wholly suspended for five years on condition that the appellant is not convicted of any offence involving violence during the period of suspension.

The case clarifies the distinction between robbery and assault in South African criminal law, emphasising that violence alone is insufficient for robbery unless accompanied by intent to steal. It reinforces appellate scrutiny of whether all elements of an offence are proved and confirms that assault with intent to do grievous bodily harm is a competent verdict on a robbery charge under s 260 of the Criminal Procedure Act.