Retselisitsoe Leepile and Another v DPP and Another (CRI/APN 704 of 2012) [2012] LSHC 90 (17 December 2012)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO CRI/APN/704/2012 In the matter between:- RETŠELISITSOE LEEPILE KHOTSO TLELAI 1st Applicant 2nd Applicant Vs DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS 1st Respondent THE LEARNED MAGISTRATE MR. MOKHESI 2nd Respondent CRI/APN/705/2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO In the matter between:- KHOTSO TLELAI Vs 1st Applicant DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS 1st Respondent THE LEARNED MAGISTRATE MRS. LETSIKA 2nd Respondent JUDGMENTS Coram: Hon. Hlajoane J. Date of Hearing: 17th December, 2012 Date of Judgment: 17th December, 2012 Summary Applications for reviews where sentence imposed is for a minor offence and in terms of 5.4 of Amendment to Criminal Procedures and Evidence Act 1998 accused to be sentence to community service. Convictions confirmed and sentence of imprisonment replaced by option of a fine. [1] Both these cases came before this Court for review. The Applicants were in each case tried before the Magistrate’s Court in Mafeteng for assault with intent to do grievous bodily harm. They all pleaded guilty to the charges and were duly convicted and sentenced to terms of imprisonment without an option of a fine. [2] The matters are before me for review and both proceedings per orders of this Court were duly disputed to the Register in terms of Rule 50 (1) (b) of the High Court Rules. ______________________ 1. High Court Rule No. 9 of 1980 [3] Applicants have alleged irregularities in the conduct if the trials before the Magistrate’s Court. The Applicants were unrepresented before the trial Court. Besides complaining of not having been implications of proceedings unrepresented, informed of pleading guilty to the charges, the likely sentence in the event of being convicted and absence of an interpreter they also referred to some provisions of the Amendment to the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act. the [4] Relying on the provisions of section 4 of the Act Applicants have elaborated on the import of that section. The amendment has laid down a provision showing that a person sentenced to imprisonment for a period of less than 18 months should ordinarily not be detained but be engaged to community work as opposed to imprisonment. [5] Applicants further showed that the offence they were alleged to have committed was referred to by the Court as a minor offence. [6] When counsels on both sides appeared before me, they were both agreed that the offences were not serious and that community service in terms of the amendments Act would be appropriate or an option of a fine. [7] In the circumstances of both cases the Court confirmed the convictions in both cases, but altered the imprisonment term to a fineof M1000,00 each, and that having paid the fine each to be released from prison forth with. _____________________________________ 2. Criminal Procedure and evidence Amendment Act 1998 A. M. HLAJOANE J JUDGE For Applicants: For Respondents: Mr. Molise Mr. Letsie