๐‹๐ข๐ฐ๐จ๐ง๐๐ž ๐‚๐จ๐ฎ๐ซ๐ญ ๐€๐œ๐ช๐ฎ๐ข๐ญ๐ฌ ๐Œ๐š๐ง ๐ข๐ง ๐๐ฎ๐ซ๐ ๐ฅ๐š๐ซ๐ฒ ๐š๐ง๐ ๐“๐ก๐ž๐Ÿ๐ญ ๐‚๐š๐ฌ๐ž

๐‹๐ข๐ฐ๐จ๐ง๐๐ž ๐‚๐จ๐ฎ๐ซ๐ญ ๐€๐œ๐ช๐ฎ๐ข๐ญ๐ฌ ๐Œ๐š๐ง ๐ข๐ง ๐๐ฎ๐ซ๐ ๐ฅ๐š๐ซ๐ฒ ๐š๐ง๐ ๐“๐ก๐ž๐Ÿ๐ญ ๐‚๐š๐ฌ๐ž

Published on May 7, 2026 at 12:30 PM by Edgar Naitha

328 words โ€ข approx. 2 min read

The Senior Resident Magistrateโ€™s Court sitting at Liwonde has acquitted 28-year-old Patrick Julius in a burglary and theft case after finding that the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case.

The accused was charged with two counts of burglary and theft arising from an alleged incident that occurred on 8 February 2026 in Msamati Village, under Traditional Authority Nsamala in Balaka District. He was arrested on 15 February 2026 on suspicion of breaking into a house and stealing two smart TVs, a microwave, two pairs of shoes, a subwoofer, and a mobile phone.

Following his arrest, the accused sought legal assistance from the Legal Aid Bureau and was represented by Counsel Lovemore Gama Ngwira with assistance from Chief Legal Aid Advocate Raphael Makanje.

During the trial, the State called three witnesses in an effort to prove its case. However, at the close of the prosecutionโ€™s case, the defence made a submission of no case to answer, arguing that the evidence presented was insufficient to link the accused to the alleged offences.

In particular, the prosecution failed to call material witnesses essential to its case and did not present key exhibits allegedly recovered from the accusedโ€™s house. These omissions created significant evidential gaps and undermined the prosecutionโ€™s case, leaving the evidence on record insufficient to warrant placing the accused on his defence.

In its ruling, the Court agreed with the defence and held that the prosecution had failed to meet the legal threshold required to put the accused on his defence. The Court further observed that none of the witnesses provided direct or reliable evidence placing the accused at the scene of the alleged crime or in possession of the stolen property.

In light of these shortcomings, the Court found that no reasonable tribunal, properly directing itself on the law and evidence, could convict the accused if called upon to make a defence.

Accordingly, the Court found that Patrick Julius had no case to answer and acquitted him.

Subscribe to our Youtube Channel: