By Patience Gondo
FOUR people, two of them women, are on trial at Beitbridge for allegedly being found with dagga worth US$7 586.
Michael Vengai Majari (35), Tinashe Muleya (27), Sharon Kahiya (32) and Pepiullar Mataka (27) are denying the charge saying the dagga belonged to Washton Sherera who is at large.
The four had been charged under Section 156(1)(a) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23].
The State, led by Mercy Nyathi, alleges that on January 31 2026 at the 80-kilometre peg along the Beitbridge–Masvingo Road, the four acted in common purpose to transport 75.86 kilogrammes of dagga.
Majari and Muleya travelling in a white AD Van when they were stopped and searched at around 2AM at a roadblock manned by the National Task Force near the Lion and Elephant Motel.
Police recovered three suitcases from the vehicle’s boot containing 14 compressed blocks of dagga, while two additional blocks were found behind the driver’s seat wrapped in plastic bags.
The drugs were seized and the two were arrested before being referred to the CID Drugs and Narcotics section in Beitbridge.
Investigations led to the arrest of Kahiya in Dulibadzimu, Beitbridge, after the first two accused implicated her as the person who handed over the consignment.
Further leads resulted in the arrest of Mataka in Chegutu, who was alleged to be the intended recipient of the drugs.
Majari, Muleya, Kahiya and Mataka have denied the charges instead implicating a man identified as Sherera yet to be apprehended, as the owner of the dagga.
During the continuation of trial before Magistrate Charity Maphosa on Monday, Muleya maintained he was merely a passenger with no knowledge of the drugs.
He told the court he had travelled to Beitbridge to visit a sick relative and later sought transport back to Chegutu.
Muleya said he boarded Majari’s vehicle after failing to secure alternative transport, insisting he was unaware of the contents in the vehicle.
Kahiya also denied any involvement, telling the court that she was acting on instructions from her husband, Sherera, a cross-border transporter.
She said she handed over the luggage to Majari believing it contained groceries from South Africa and was unaware of any illegal substances.
Mataka, on the other hand, distanced herself from the allegations, arguing that her arrest was based solely on a mobile number linked to her residence.
She told the court that she does not know anyone by the name associated with the number and questioned why police singled her out among other tenants at her residence.
She maintained there was no evidence proving she was the intended recipient of the drugs.
The court also heard that forensic examination of the accused persons’ mobile phones did not establish any communication links between them prior to the incident.
Majari and Muleya are represented by Tawonga Musina of Musina Law Chambers while Kahiya and Mataka are being represented by Forbes Muchihwande Sithole.
Maphosa is expected to deliver judgment on April 17, 2026.