R v Jantjies

• Jurisdiction: South Africa
• Judge: Schreiner JA, Steyn JA, Beyers JA, Hall AJA and Price AJA
• Judgment Date: 10 March 1958
• Citation: 1958 (2) SA 273 (A)
• Hearing Date: 03 March 1958
• Court: Appellate Division

F Schreiner, J.A.:

The appellant, a young native who gave his age as seventeen, was convicted of murder by DE WET, J., and assessors sitting in the Witwatersrand Local Division and, no extenuating circumstances being found, was sentenced to death. Ten days later application was made to DE WET, J., for leave to appeal to this Court on the ground that G further evidence had come to light which it was hoped to lead upon a reopening of the case. Leave to appeal may be granted, even if there is no prospect of success on the existing record, if there is a reasonable prospect that leave to adduce further evidence will be granted, and that, if it is, the result may be different (see R v Ncube, 1955 (2) SA 152 (AD), R v Siwesa, 1957 (2) SA 223 (AD)). The learned H Judge granted leave generally but his reason for doing so was presumably that he thought that there was a reasonable prospect that this Court would allow further evidence to be led which might affect the result.

Before the hearing of the appeal notice was given of an application to 'amend the grounds on which leave to appeal was granted' by adding grounds to the effect that the judgment was against the weight of evidence and that the Court was influenced by the answers to leading

Schreiner JA

questions put to witnesses called or recalled by the learned Judge, and was also influenced by inadmissible evidence. There is no provision requiring grounds of appeal to be framed in appeals to this Court. When leave to appeal is granted the leave may be limited, so as to allow only A particular grounds of appeal to be advanced. This was done, for instance, in R v Mgxwiti, 1954 (1) SA 370 (AD) - see p. 374. But if leave to appeal is granted generally all issues may be canvassed (cf. R v Nzimande, 1957 (3) SA 772 (A.D. at p. 774). The proceedings before this Court had accordingly to be dealt with both as an appeal on the record as it stands and, in the alternative, as an application in the course of the appeal for leave to adduce further evidence.

B I shall deal first with the appeal on the existing record. The medical evidence established that the deceased died as the result of a stab wound which penetrated the skull and reached the brain. There were two other stab wounds and several lacerations found on the deceased's body. It was proved that the deceased received these wounds C late in the afternoon of the 1st January 1957, while he was in a room occupied by a woman named Salamina. This room formed part of a house belonging to her father, one Shadrack, a preacher. The house was near the Rietfontein Hospital, which lies to the north-east of Johannesburg. The principal Crown witnesses were Salamina and her lover, Hendrik. D According to them Salamina was ill in bed on the afternoon in question and there were in her room at the time four persons, namely, herself, Hendrik, the appellant and the deceased. Other persons were present in the house but not in the room of Salamina at the time when the deceased met his death. Salamina said that the appellant simply stabbed the E deceased without warning; there was no quarrelling or fighting. Hendrik said that he had been travelling and had dozed off when he was awakened by a noise to find that the deceased had already been stabbed and the appellant was standing with a knife in his hand. At Hendrik's suggestion the appellant fetched water which they threw over the deceased, apparently with the object of reviving him.

F The appellant gave evidence in which he said that he left Salamina's room to go to the lavatory. While he was there he heard a noise in the house. He returned to the room and found Hendrik holding the deceased, whose head was red with blood. He asked Hendrik how the deceased had got hurt. Hendrik did not answer the question but sent him to fetch water.

G According to the appellant Salamina was on that day selling liquor in the house and everyone on the premises was drunk. Salamina and Hendrik on the other hand said that there was not a trace of liquor on the premises and everyone was sober. A police witness who arrived not long...