Court Forfeits Mandara Stand and Hilux in NetOne Fraud Case

The High Court has ordered that a residential stand in Mandara and a Toyota Hilux be handed over to the State after ruling that both assets were purchased using funds linked to criminal activity involving a former NetOne employee.

In a judgment delivered by Justice Benjamin Chikowero, the court found that the property and the vehicle were proceeds of crime and formed part of a deliberate attempt to hide the benefits of alleged fraud committed by former NetOne cashier Daniel Kalira.

Kalira, who was listed as the first respondent, is currently facing criminal charges before the Harare Magistrates Court. He is accused of defrauding NetOne of more than ZWL$108 million through the illegal manipulation of airtime vouchers, as well as theft of trust property and money laundering.

The second respondent, Charlotte Chivavarirwa, Kalira’s former partner and the mother of his four-year-old child, was found to be the registered owner of the Toyota Hilux. The court ruled that the vehicle was acquired during the period of the alleged fraud and rejected her claim that it was purchased using proceeds from mining activities.

Justice Chikowero held that the explanations given regarding the vehicle’s funding were not credible, finding that the supposed gold mining joint venture and related documentation were fabricated to mask the true source of the money.

The third respondent, Harriet Kalira, who is Kalira’s maternal grandmother, was listed as holding an undivided share in Stand 913 Mandara Township. The court concluded that she was used as a front to conceal the origin of the funds used to acquire the property.

Dismissing claims that the Mandara stand was bought using money sent from Australia as a gratuity by a former employer, Justice Chikowero said the explanation was riddled with inconsistencies and lacked credibility.

The court found that Daniel Kalira personally negotiated the purchase, paid US$52,000 in cash and dealt directly with the seller, while the person in whose name the property was registered neither viewed the stand nor made any payment.

“The most reasonable conclusion from the evidence is that the true purchaser was the first respondent,” the judge ruled.

However, the court declined to forfeit several luxury vehicles after the State acknowledged that they had been acquired before the alleged criminal activity. A separate forfeiture bid involving a BMW 320d was also struck off the roll after it emerged that the alleged owner had not been properly cited.

Justice Chikowero ordered the Mandara property and the Toyota Hilux to be transferred to the State, directing the Registrar of Deeds and the Registrar of Motor Vehicles to implement the forfeiture. Each party was ordered to cover its own legal costs.