Supreme Court of Mauritius, 28 avril 2026, 2026 RDR 83 – Police v Bundhoo

Police v Bundhoo

2026 RDR 83

CN: 1868/2025

THE DISTRICT COURT OF RIVIERE DU REMPART

In the matter of:-

Police

v.

N Bundhoo

JUDGMENT

Accused is prosecuted on an information for the offence of assault in breach of sections 228(1) and 230(1) of the Criminal Code.

The offence was allegedly committed at Arya Mandir Road, Petit Raffray, on 12.11.2023 (“the material date”). Accused pleaded not guilty and was assisted by Counsel. Police Prosecutor conducted the case for Prosecution. Proceedings were held in Creole.

The case for Prosecution rests essentially on the testimony of witness no. 3. It transpires from his testimony that Accused and his relatives surrounded him, they pushed him, and Accused punched him in the stomach and head. He conceded that he reported the matter on the next day at 6.50 hours. When questioned about the fact that he said in his testimony that the incident occurred after 7 p.m whereas in his statement he mentioned 18.45 hours, he replied that the incident happened at night. When questioned about the fact that he was surrounded by the relatives of Accused, he replied that two of them are known to him. When questioned about the fact that he did not report a case against the other persons involved, he replied that he saw only Accused. He denied making a false accusation because Accused reported a case of assault causing incapacity of labour against him on 29.04.2023. He admitted that there is a case against him before this Court in which Accused is the complainant, and is currently on bail.

Witness no. 2, PC 1519 Kutwaroo, explained that he recorded a statement from witness no. 3 on 13.11.2023 at 6.52 hours, and he noticed a reddish mark on the left side of his head above the ear. He conceded that witness no. 3 reported that the incident occurred at 18.45 hours. He was subsequently requested to read the first line of the statement of witness no. 3 bearing folio number 23/426882, to wit, “Hier le 12 novembre 2023 vers 8h45 tantot”. When questioned about

the fact that he could not see alleged reddish mark above the ear of witness no. 3 because of the hair, he replied that the latter had short hair at that time. When questioned about PF 58, he replied that he is not aware of same.

Witness no. 4, Dr M S Yarroo, explained that witness no. 3 attended Mediclinic Goodlands on the material date at 7.26 hours. He described his injuries as follows: trauma to face, nose, lips, left side of the head and left clavicle. He added that the patient was stable, there was swelling over the upper lips and on the left side of the lower lips, there was abrasion over the left side of the nose, there was abrasion over the left temporal area and on the median aspect of the left clavicle, there was a swelling of approximately 3 x 3 cm over the left temporal area, and there was no active bleeding. He went on to explain that the patient was conscious, alert and oriented, he had no fever, the vitals were within normal limits, and he was given medication and sent for dressing and examination by radiologist. He conceded that he would not know if witness no. 3 has been assaulted and he is relying on the latter’s version. He also conceded that if there was a case of assault that would have been the doing of several persons.

No PF 58 was produced.

No evidence was adduced by the defence.

“Coups et blessures” is defined in Vocabulaire Juridique, Cornu, as follows : « Atteinte portée à l’intégrité physique d’autrui : les blessures impliquant une lésion interne ou externe du corps de la victime (ex. plaie, fracture), les coups portés directement par une personne ou à l’aide d’un instrument quelconque consistant en un choc infligé (ex. coup de poing, coup de baton) ».

As regards the elements that need to be established by Prosecution, note 11 of Répertoire de droit pénal et de procédure pénale, Violences volontaires, Yves MAYAUD, is of relevance : « La violence se matérialise par un comportement (V. infra, nos 12 et s.), un résultat (V. infra, nos 22 et s.), et un lien de causalité du premier au second (V. infra, nos 54 et s.). Cette trilogie est d'ailleurs le propre de toutes les violences, qu'elles soient intentionnelles ou non intentionnelles, tant, pour les placer parmi les atteintes à l'intégrité de la personne, elles doivent, non seulement relever d'une action dirigée vers un tel résultat, mais encore participer d'un comportement l'ayant effectivement généré. »

In the case at hand, the Court notes various discrepancies, namely, in respect of time of the alleged assault and the injuries. As regards the time, witness no. 3 stated in Court that the incident happened after 7 p.m., and in his statement it is mentioned 18.45 hours and 08.45 hours. The doctor mentioned that he examined him at 07.26 p.m. As regards the injuries, the doctor said that he sustained, namely, trauma to face, nose, lips, left side of the head and left clavicle. Witness no. 3 stated that he was injured on the head, face and stomach. Witness no. 2 stated that he noticed a reddish mark on the left side of the head above the ear. It is apposite to note that the doctor mentioned nothing about the stomach, and witness no. 2 mentioned nothing about

stomach, abrasion over the nose or trauma to face, nose, lips and left clavicle. These inconsistencies undermine the credibility of the testimony of witness no. 3 who is the main witness for prosecution.

In addition, the Court notes that witness no. 2 stated that the statement was recorded on the next day following the incident, and witness no. 3 admitted that there is a pending case against him in which Accused reported that he assaulted him. As such, the risk of concoction cannot be ignored especially that witness no. 3 elected to report a case against Accused only despite having said that two among the relatives who surrounded him are known to him.

In the circumstances, the Court finds it unsafe to pronounce a conviction. Consequently, Accused is granted the benefit of the doubt, and the case against him is dismissed.

Z Cassamally (Dr) Ag. Senior District Magistrate 28.04.2026