SC: Suit Alleging Coercion or Undue Influence Cannot be Rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC  ||  Cal HC: Once ED Attachment is Confirmed, Challenge Becomes Academic; PMLA Remedy Must be Pursued  ||  MP HC: Pen-Drive Evidence Cannot be Introduced At a Late Trial Stage Without Proof or Relevance  ||  Calcutta HC: Employee Can't be Stopped From Joining Rival Post-Resignation; Trade Secrets Protected  ||  Calcutta HC: Banks Must Provide Forensic Audit Report Before Calling an Account Fraudulent  ||  Del HC: Woman Cannot Demand Re-Entry to Abandoned Matrimonial Home if Alternate Accommodation Exists  ||  Calcutta HC: Land Acquisition For Industrial Park is Public Purpose; Leasing to Industry is Valid  ||  Patna HC: PwD Recruitment Must Comply With RPwD Act; Executive Resolutions Cannot Override the Law  ||  Madras HC: Individuals Facing Criminal Trial Must Get Court Permission Even to Renew Passports  ||  Calcutta HC: Demolition Orders Cannot be Challenged under Article 226 if a Statutory Appeal Exists    

Mxolisi Mananga & Others vs. Minister of Police - (04 Jun 2021)

Arrest, without a warrant is permitted, where an arresting officer held a reasonable suspicion that, a dangerous wound had been inflicted

Criminal

The appeal arose from the dismissal of the appellants’ claim for wrongful and unlawful arrest in the Eastern Cape Division of the High Court, Mthatha. The issue before the present Court, concerned the entitlement of a police officer to arrest a suspect, without a warrant, in terms of Section 40(1)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1977, on a suspicion that an assault had been committed and a dangerous wound had been inflicted. The Appellants had been involved in an altercation relating to the use of dipping facilities for cattle in the Ncora administrative area, near Confimvaba, in the Eastern Cape. They had allegedly assaulted the complainant, causing him to sustain lacerations to his head and a fractured wrist.

The complainant was admitted to the Cofimvaba Hospital where he was treated, and detained for a period of four days. When a charge with intent to do grievous bodily harm was laid with the South African Police Service at Cofimvaba, Warrant Officer proceeded to Ncora to interview Complainant. He witnessed the injuries sustained and formed the impression that, Complainant had been severely injured to the head and arm. He accordingly arrested the Appellants, without a warrant, and charged them with assault with intent to do grievous bodily harm. They were detained for three days, before appearing in court.

The Appellants misconstrue the nature of the inquiry. It is not required of a police officer to examine the wounds of a victim, as a doctor would, nor would that be appropriate. He is merely required to have regard to the facts and circumstances at his disposal, and, where reasonably possible, to satisfy himself of the merit thereof. If, on a consideration thereof, there are reasonable grounds to suspect that a dangerous wound has been inflicted, he is entitled to arrest the suspect without first obtaining a warrant.

An arrest, without a warrant, in terms of Section 40(1)(b) of the Act, 1977 was permitted under Schedule 1 to the Act, where an arresting officer held a reasonable suspicion that a dangerous wound had been inflicted. It considered that by ‘dangerous wound’ is meant an injury endangering life or limb and that Warrant Officer Qunta reasonably suspected that the appellants had inflicted such injuries to Mr Sambunjana. It accordingly held that the High Court, Mthatha, had correctly concluded that the arrest was lawful. Appeal dismissed.

Tags : ARREST   DETENTION   LEGALITY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved