In Brief
The appellant, a senior government officer (Director of Mines and Geology), was accused of directing issuance of mining permits without obtaining mandatory state government sanction under applicable mining regulations. A trial court discharged him, but the High Court reversed this. The Supreme Court affirmed the High Court, holding that at the discharge stage under criminal procedure rules, an accused can only rely on prosecution evidence, not their own defence. The appellant's claims of bonafide action based on past practice and legal advice could not be considered at this stage. The court found sufficient grounds for suspicion to proceed to trial, leaving full adjudication to the trial court."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.