Sifiso Titi Ntusi had been sentenced to 10 years' imprisonment.
The KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) High Court in Pietermaritzburg has overturned both the conviction and sentence of a man previously found guilty of attempted murder, ruling instead that the evidence supported only a conviction for common assault.
On Friday, Judge Pieter Bezuidenhout delivered the judgment in the appeal of Sifiso Titi Ntusi, who had originally been sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment, with two years suspended for five years.
Ntusi and his brother were jointly charged in the lower court, but the co-accused was acquitted.
He then appealed both his conviction and sentence with the leave of the High Court.
Complainant sustains injuries
The complainant testified during the initial trial that he encountered Ntusi and his brother near his home around midday.
According to his account, Ntusi allegedly shouted his name, approached him, and confronted him over accusations that he had referred to their mother in a derogatory term when he was “in Johannesburg”.
The complainant stated that Ntusi tried to hit him with his fist but missed, after which the brother allegedly tripped him, causing him to fall onto stones on the ground.
The two men then allegedly kicked him and “tramped on him on his body and face”.
ALSO READ: Fake mechanic who ‘milked’ victims sees jail sentence for car theft cut to 8 years
He was later taken to Ncongeni Hospital, stayed overnight, and was discharged the next day.
The court also heard medical testimony from Dr Charity Ngcobo, who compiled the J88 form – a medical report documenting injuries.
She confirmed that the complainant had sustained injuries to his eye and nose and was referred for a CT scan at Ladysmith Hospital.
The scan reflected “a mild intercranial brain injury” and “mild bleeding”, which normally happens after certain traumatic injury, prompting a 24-hour hospital admission.
How the dispute came about
A witness, Ndumiso Mvelase, told the court that the community had been experiencing recurring water disruptions, but he was unable to confirm whether the supply was affected on the day of the incident.
Another witness, Induna Mr Majola, also testified that water shortages were common in the area and that several households had water pipes running across their yards.
Under cross-examination, the defence put forward that the complainant had allegedly entered Ntusi’s property without permission and that the confrontation stemmed from a dispute over access to the shared water line.
READ MORE: Man sentenced to 15 years in jail for attempting to kill 84-year-old granny
Ntusi, taking the stand in his own defence, said the disputed pipe ran through his garden and that he found the complainant there with tools, apparently attempting to reconnect the supply.
He explained that he stepped on the pipe to stop him from doing so.
According to Ntusi, the complainant then struck him, causing his cellphone to fall to the ground.
The complainant allegedly took the phone, prompting Ntusi to run back toward his house.
When the complainant refused to return it, Ntusi said he “just retaliated” and did so “by mistake”.
Lower court’s approach
After hearing both the accused and defence witnesses, the magistrate found that two “mutually destructive versions” had been presented.
The presiding officer found that Ntusi’s version is not so improbable that it cannot be reasonably possibly true.
He concluded the complainant had the right to reconnect the water pipe and that Ntusi had interfered without cause.
The court accepted that the blow admitted by Ntusi could not account for all injuries, but found him guilty of attempted murder.
High Court ruling
During the appeal hearing before the High Court, the state conceded that a case of attempted murder had not been made out, since proving such an offence requires establishing intent.
Bezuidenhout, in his judgment, pointed out that the magistrate “in no way dealt with” the question of intent, and that it had not been explored during cross-examination of any witness, including the doctor.
The judge further found that the complainant’s testimony, as the sole witness, was “unreliable” and conflicted with the medical findings.
READ MORE: KZN convicted murderer sentenced to 140 years in jail
Given that Ntusi admitted being present at the scene and striking the complainant once, Bezuidenhout concluded that the case had to be assessed based on his version of events.
The court also examined whether Ntusi’s conduct amounted to self-defence or assault.
Bezuidenhout highlighted that Ntusi’s own admission that he “retaliated” demonstrated that he had committed assault, as he had the option to remove himself from the situation.
Sentence reduced to 12 months
Turning to sentencing, Bezuidenhout noted that Ntusi was aged 27 at the time, employed as a taxi driver, and the father of two young children at the time of his sentencing on 25 April 2024.
The judge also said Ntusi had been in custody since the sentencing proceedings.
He further highlighted longstanding disputes over water access in the community, confirmed by the local induna.
Considering the circumstances, the judge found that Ntusi was not someone “who requires to be prevented from committing further offences” and that a partially suspended sentence was inappropriate.
Instead, he imposed a sentence of 12 months’ imprisonment, antedated to the date of sentencing.
NOW READ: Six convicted for mob justice murder in Free State
