ANNEXURE “A” Case no: /2018
THE STATE
VERSUS
VISVANATHAN PILLAY ACCUSED 1
ANDRIES PETRUS JANSE VAN RENSBURG ACCUSED 2
COUNT 1:
THAT the accused are guilty of the crime of:
CONTRAVENTION OF SECTION 49(1) READ WITH SECTIONS 2 AS
WELL AS 1 OF THE REGULATION OF INTERCEPTION OF
COMMUNICTIONS AND TRANSACTIONS ACT (RICA), ACT 70 OF
2000 (UNLAWFUL INTERCEPTION OF COMMUNICATION)
AGAINST ACCUSED 1 AND 2 ONLY.
IN THAT during the period June 2007 until November 2007 and at or near
Silverton, PRETORIA in the district of Pretoria
accused 1 and 2, did unlawfully and intentionally procure Mr Helgard
Lombard and/or authorise Mr Lombard to intercept communication within
the offices of the Directorate of Special Operations (DSO), and those of
the National Prosecution Authority (NPA) without an interception direction
issued by the designated judge in terms of the Regulation of Interception
of Communications and Provision of Communication- Related Information
Act, Act 70 of 2002 and thereby contravening the said provisions of the
Act.ANNEXURE “B"
Case no: /2018
THE STATE
VERSUS
VISVANATHAN PILLAY ACCUSED 1
JOHANN HENDRICK VAN LOGGERENBERG ACCUSED 3
COUNT 2
That the accused are guilty of:
CONTRAVENTION OF SECTION 10(b) READ WITH SECTIONS 1, 2,
24, 25 and 26(1) OF THE PREVENTION AND COMBATING OF
CORRUPT ACTIVITIES (POCA) ACT 12 OF 2004.
(UNAUTHORISED GRATIFICATION BY A PARTY TO AN
EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIP)
(AGAINST ACCUSED 1 AND 3 ONLY)
“IN THAT upon or about August to September 2008 and at or near SARS
offices, Brooklyn, Pretoria within the jurisdiction of this court,
Accused 1 and 3, whilst being in the employ of the South African Revenue
Services (SARS), an organ of the State within the public administration
(although outside the public service), did directly or indirectly and
unlawfully give or agree to give Mr Lombard an unauthorised gratification
to wit, cash in the amount of approximately one hundred thousand rands(R100 000,00) whether for the benefit of himself or for the benefit of
another person, to act in relation to the exercise, carrying out or
performance of Mr Lombard’s powers, duties or functions within the scope
of Mr Lombard’s employment relationship at the South African Revenue
Services (SARS), and thereby contravening the said provisions of the Act.ANNEXURE “C” Case no: 12018
THE STATE
VERSUS
VISVANATHAN PILLAY ACCUSED 1
JOHANN HENDRICK VAN LOGGERENBERG ACCUSED 2
ALTERNATIVE TO COUNT 2
THAT the accused are guilty of
CONTRAVENTION OF SECTION 3 READ WITH SECTIONS 1, 2, 24 25
and 26(1) OF THE PREVENTION AND COMBATTING OF CORRUPT
ACTIVITIES (POCA) ACT, ACT 12 OF 2004
(GENERAL CORRUPTION — OFFEREING OF A BENEFIT)
(AGAINST ACCUSED 1 AND 3 ONLY)
IN THAT upon or about August to September 2008, and at or near SARS
Offices, Brooklyn in Pretoria within the jurisdiction of this court,
Accused 1 and 3 directly or indirectly gave or agreed to give Mr Lombard
gratification, to wit cash in the amount of approximately one hundred
thousand rands only (R100 000,00) whether for the benefit of himself or
for the benefit of another person, to act in a manner that amounts to the
illegal, dishonest, unauthorised, incomplete or biased exercise, carrying
out or performance of any powers, duties or functions arising out of a
constitutional, statutory, contractual or any other obligation, designed toachieve an unjustified result; or that amounts to any unauthorised or
improper inducement to do or not to do anything and thereby contravening
the said provisions of the Act.