Mzuvukile Wellington Cenenda, one of the accused in the case against eight suspects who were linked and indicted on 179 charges, including racketeering activity charges in 2017, appeared at the Middelburg High Court on Tuesday, for judgment on his bail regarding new facts.

Cenenda was dubbed one of SA’s most wanted cash-in-transit heist kingpins by various media houses across the country a few years back.

According to a briefing in 2022 held by the National Head for Directorate Priority Crime Investigation, Lieutenant General Godfrey Lebeya, an investigation targeted a criminal group allegedly involved in cash-in-transit heists in Mpumalanga, Free State, Limpopo, North West and Gauteng. The goal of the investigation was to link the suspects to the cases and prosecute them as an organised criminal syndicate.

According to information received in court, Cenenda was previously released on bail, however, he absconded and evaded court.
He allegedly changed his name to Muzi Masilela and started a new life in Bloemfontein.

He was later arrested in 2018 and was allegedly found in possession of a stolen car.

In his argument to be granted bail again, he told the court about the delays in prosecution of the case, the length of the trial and the fact that he has been in custody close to seven years awaiting trial, which amounted to new and exceptional circumstances permitting his release on bail.

According to the court, the indictment originally contained 179 charges, and now the suspects face 190 charges in total.

Cenenda’s legal representatives said the delays in prosecution were caused after a discussion between all parties regarding the separation of trials back in 2023, which was later objected to by the State 11 months later in 2024.

He further argued that although the matter was postponed to October 6, he foresees that it won’t proceed to trial anytime soon, and might even start in 2026 or later.

The State argued that the delays in prosecution and the length of the trial should not be considered by the court as new facts, and that these new facts brought on by the defence were used previously in another bail application and rejected by that judge.

The court said that of the 190 charges, Cenenda is facing 84 charges or fewer, and the trial was always going to be lengthy because of the nature of the charges the suspects are facing.

The judge, in concluding her judgment, mentioned the delays Cenenda caused to the trial when he absconded from bail for over 14 months before he was arrested.

She highlighted that it must be noted that his being kept in custody is not punishment, but it is to ensure the court doesn’t just release someone who won’t blink twice in absconding bail.

“I am fully convinced that the applicant has no desire to attend his trial until it is completed, and he failed to show exceptional circumstances that allow for his release on bail,” said the judge.

Cenenda’s application for bail was denied and dismissed.

He was remanded to custody, and the case was postponed to October 6.