POLOKWANE – The Polokwane High Court on Wednesday dismissed Lehlogonolo “Shebeshxt” Chauke’s appeal for bail, ruling that the factors he raised did not constitute new exceptional circumstances.

Chauke faces charges of attempted murder, culpable homicide, assault with intent to do grievous bodily harm, and malicious damage to property. He had asked the court to release him on bail pending trial.

Court finds no new exceptional circumstances

One of his main arguments was the hardship of being separated from his newborn child.

While the judge acknowledged the difficulty, the court found that it was not unique. The judgment held that separation from family, including a newborn child, is an inevitable consequence of being in custody and applies to all accused persons awaiting trial.

The court also considered Chauke’s role within his family. Citing case law, the judge said the evidence showed that Chauke is the child’s father but not the primary caregiver, noting that his partner fulfils that role.

The court further found that no expert evidence, such as a report from a social worker, had been presented to demonstrate that his detention was causing specific harm to the infant. Without such evidence, the hardship did not meet the legal threshold for exceptional circumstances.

Mpho “Grootman” Tsebetsebe who says he is close to Lehlogonolo 'Shebeshxt' Chauke told the media that he found it important to respond to those questioning the people’s support for the accused despite the magnitude of crimes against him. pic.twitter.com/UKQtlQECTr

— Polokwane Observer (@PolokwaneObserv) August 5, 2026

Financial claims under scrutiny

The judgment also questioned Chauke’s financial disclosures.

The court heard that the partner he described as financially dependent on him holds a management position in his business and oversees its finances.

The judge also questioned how much income Chauke continues to earn from his music career, noting that he has continued to receive awards while in custody, and asked how those earnings are being used.

The court further noted concerns over Chauke’s claim that he had refunded fans for cancelled performances, pointing out that legal action had been instituted against him over an alleged unpaid refund. The judge said this raised uncertainty about whether the court had been given a full and accurate account of his financial affairs.

Medical and delay arguments rejected

Chauke’s legal team also relied on an untreated leg injury and delays in the regional court proceedings as new grounds for bail.

The court rejected both arguments, finding that the medical issue had already been raised during the initial bail application and that Correctional Services had not denied him medical treatment.

On the alleged delays, the judge held that the period between Chauke’s arrest and the transfer of the matter was not unusual for cases of this nature.

Claims that witnesses were deliberately delaying the proceedings were dismissed as speculative.

Bail appeal dismissed, Chauke remains in custody

In dismissing the appeal, the court found that Chauke had failed to establish exceptional circumstances as required under Section 60 of the Criminal Procedure Act, or to satisfy the test set out in Section 65(4).

It concluded that the magistrate had not erred in refusing bail and dismissed the appeal.