The Lilongwe Chief Resident Magistrate’s Court has acquitted Paramount Holdings Limited directors in a case they were accused of making a false declaration in a procurement contract.
They were charged with conspiracy to commit a felony contrary to Section 404 of the Penal Code, making a false document contrary to Section 353 of the Penal Code and uttering a false document contrary to Section 360 of the Penal Code by proclaiming that their company was an authorised dealer of Yamaha motorcycles in Malaŵi.
In a determination dated June 27, the court observed that six months had elapsed after the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) filed a certificate of discontinuance.
Reads the judgement: “The accused persons Prakash Virgi Ghedia, Arvindkumar Atit Patel, Suresh Khimji Jagatiya and Paramount Holdings Limited are hereby acquitted from the charges herein.
“That the State is barred from bringing any charges against the accused persons herein on account of the same facts.”
The acquittal comes after DPP Masauko Chamkakala in March last year discontinued the case before the Legal Affairs Committee of Parliament met HIMon May 21 2024 and recommended revival of the case.
After 13 months of the DPP’s inaction on the matter, Paramount directors on May 30 2025 moved the court seeking that the matter be discontinued for want of prosecution as per Section 77 of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Code (CP&EC).
Section 77 (a) of the CP&EC states that after persons have been discharged, such discharge shall not operate as a bar to any subsequent proceedings commenced once within six months of the discharge, on account of the same facts.
In an interview yesterday, Ghedia said the court ruling was a relief, saying: “All we have been doing is to follow the law, nothing else.”
Indigenous Malawian-owned Luthando Holdings, one of the local Yamaha motorcycles dealers, is an interested party in the case and already moved the High Court of Malawi to review the DPP’s decision to ignore directives of the Legal Affairs Committee.
In an interview after the Paramount directors’ acquittal, lawyer representing Luthando Holdings, Jefferson Luwa, said there were two possibilities on the matter.
He said: “The High Court case can continue to establish whether the DPP’s exercise of his powers was in line with the law.
“Secondly, the applicant is also seeking an interim relief to stay the proceedings in the lower court. But then it may just simply be academic because the proceedings sought to be stayed are no longer there.”
Meanwhile, Malawi Law Society (MLS) honorary secretary Francis M’mame said in terms of the law, it is the Legal Affairs Committee that has oversight of exercise of the DPP’s powers.
He said: “Since there are also court proceedings in form of the judicial review application by Luthando Holdings, it would not be proper for the MLS to give its opinions on the matter as the same is sub judice.”
Section 99(2e and 3) of the Constitution empowers the DPP to discontinue any criminal proceedings at any stage before judgement, but is required to give reasons to the Legal Affairs Committee of Parliament within 10 days for purposes of accountability.
