CCTV clears three watchmen in K12m theft case

Three watchmen have walked free from a K12 million theft case after CCTV footage failed to place them at the centre of the alleged crime.

A court in Mzuzu has acquitted three watchmen accused of helping unknown people steal property worth K12 million from SOS Construction after the prosecution failed to prove its case.

According to the Malawi Legal Aid Bureau, the Second Grade Magistrate’s Court acquitted Lingston Chima, Lickson Mzembe, and Gerald Nali, all from Mzuzu City.

The three were arrested on March 31, 2026, and charged with theft under Section 278 of the Penal Code.

The Malawi Legal Aid Bureau said the prosecution alleged that the three, who worked as watchmen at SOS Construction, helped unknown people steal two N70 batteries, a drilling machine, a grinder, an ignition car key and electric wires.

The property was valued at K12 million.
The alleged theft happened during the night of March 30 to 31, 2026, at Luwinga Location in Mzuzu City.

The bureau said the three received legal aid after their relatives approached its Mzuzu office.

Senior Legal Aid Advocate Kelvin Nyasulu, assisted by Senior Legal Aid Advocate Talumba Msiska, represented them.

The prosecution called five witnesses and presented four CCTV recordings as evidence.

According to the bureau, the recordings showed people entering the SOS Construction premises and the alleged theft taking place. However, none of the three accused men appeared in the footage.

The defence also raised questions about the dates and times shown in the recordings.

The prosecution said the theft happened on the night of March 30, but the CCTV recordings showed March 26.

There was also a difference in the time. The prosecution said the theft happened at about 11pm, while the recordings showed footage from 1:31 am.

The bureau said the defence argued that these differences made the CCTV evidence unreliable.

During cross-examination, the prosecution witnesses also failed to give enough information to clearly identify the allegedly stolen equipment, according to the bureau.

The Legal Aid Bureau argued that the prosecution had failed to prove that the three men took part in the theft or helped those who committed it.

In its ruling, the court agreed with the defence and found that the prosecution had failed to prove the key elements of the theft charge.
eThe court found that the three had no case to answer and acquitted them.