Although Ngoveni and Ngobeni are spelt differently, they are pronounced the same.
Picture: iStock
An identity mix-up at the Komatipoort Magistrate’s Court has resulted in an accused being sentenced under another accused’s case number.
On 24 July 2026, George Ngobeni appeared before Komatipoort Magistrate’s Court under case no. K212/2026 and was remanded to 13 August 2026 for trial. He remained in custody.
On the same date, another accused, David Dauro Ngoveni, appeared before the same court under case no. K213/2026. The court also remanded him to the same date as Ngobeni and kept him in custody.
Both accused face a charge of contravening the Immigration Act 13 of 2002 for being illegal in the country.
Ngobeni vs Ngoveni: Wrong man in the dock
Although Ngoveni and Ngobeni are spelt differently, they are pronounced the same.
When the two made another court appearance on 18 August, the public prosecutor called case no. K213/2026. When the case was called, they used only the surname. Ngobeni took the stand. He was charged, pleaded guilty and was convicted and sentenced. But case K213/2026 belongs to Ngoveni.
When case no. K212/2026 was called, Ngobeni, who appeared under case no. K213/2026, and who had already been convicted and sentenced, appeared again. When the case was called, the court used Ngobeni’s full name. The magistrate then realised that Ngobeni appeared under the wrong case number. His correct case number was K212/2026, not K213/2026.
Realising that she had already convicted the same accused under case no. K213/2026, the magistrate did not proceed with the trial. She sent the matter to the High Court for special review, seeking further guidance and direction.
The Mpumalanga High Court in Mbombela set aside Ngoveni’s conviction and sentence.
The High Court ordered that the matter be sent back to the magistrate’s court for a new trial.
“We agree with the magistrate that the error committed constitutes an irregularity and that the conviction in respect of proceedings in case no. K213/2026 is not in the interests of justice, given that the wrong person was convicted. There is nothing to review under case no. K212/2026, as no trial took place under that case number,” said the judge.
