The State v Thabethe and Others

The respondents were senior public officials and private individuals/entities charged with offences arising from the appointment of Nulane Investments 204 (Pty) Ltd by the Free State Department of Agriculture and Rural Development to conduct feasibility studies for the Mohoma Mobung Project. Relying on a purported letter from Worlds Window Impex India PvT Ltd, the Department deviated from constitutionally mandated procurement processes and paid Nulane approximately R24.9 million without a tender. Nulane rendered no substantive services, subcontracted limited work to Deloitte at a fraction of the cost, and transferred most of the funds through a complex web of transactions involving Islandsite, Pragat, Gateway (UAE), and Gupta-linked companies. The respondents were acquitted by the High Court at the close of the State’s case in terms of s 174 of the Criminal Procedure Act. The State sought to reserve questions of law under s 319(1) of the CPA, which the High Court refused, prompting this appeal.

The application for leave to appeal was granted. Reserved questions of law (questions 2 to 7) were decided in favour of the State. The High Court’s order acquitting the respondents was set aside. The respondents may be retried on the same charges before a different judge, as if they had not previously been acquitted.

This case is significant for clarifying the proper application of s 174 discharges and the reservation of questions of law under s 319(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It reinforces judicial accountability in complex corruption prosecutions, affirms the State’s ability to appeal erroneous acquittals based on legal misdirections, and underscores the constitutional and statutory imperatives governing public procurement and the handling of public funds.