The applicant was a former policeman previously attached to the anti-stock theft unit at Marondera. During the period from May to 28 October 2009, he together with three others allegedly stole forty-eight head of cattle from the complainant. The applicant irregularly facilitated the clearance of the stolen beasts at a time when he was no longer attached to the anti-stock theft unit and had no authority to do so. He also irregularly facilitated the acquisition of animal movement permits when it was not his function. He was convicted of stock theft and sentenced to twenty-five years imprisonment. He then applied for bail pending appeal.
The application for bail pending appeal was dismissed.
In bail pending appeal applications, where an applicant's conduct provides a strong nexus to the commission of the offence rendering prospects of success on appeal very dim, and where even if successful on appeal the applicant would still face a mandatory minimum sentence due to failure to establish special circumstances, bail pending appeal should be refused in the interests of the applicant and the due administration of justice.
The court observed that although the sentence of twenty-five years imprisonment was severe, it did not induce a sense of shock when considered against the applicant's moral blameworthiness as a former police officer who abused his position and knowledge to facilitate stock theft.
This case illustrates the Zimbabwean High Court's approach to bail pending appeal applications in serious criminal matters involving stock theft by law enforcement officers. It demonstrates that courts will consider the strength of the nexus between the applicant and the offence, prospects of success on appeal, the severity of the sentence relative to moral blameworthiness, and mandatory minimum sentences when determining such applications. The case shows that bail pending appeal will be refused where prospects of success are dim and the applicant's conduct demonstrates serious breach of trust by a former police officer.