The Polokwane Magistrate Court has refused bail to Tshwane Metropolitan Police Department (TMPD) officer Peter “Greater Gagash” Nonyane and attorney Charlotte Tibana, warning that their release could jeopardise the State’s investigation into alleged fraud involving millions of rands from deceased estates.

Tibana, 33, and Nonyane, 36, appeared before Magistrate Godfrey Netshiozwi on Friday, 4 September 2026, for their bail application.

At the heart of Netshiozwi’s decision was his concern that the two accused could interfere with witnesses, beneficiaries and other people who may be crucial to the investigation.

The magistrate said the State had presented evidence that the accused had allegedly attempted to communicate with people connected to the investigation while they were already in custody.

That evidence, he said, heightened the risk that their release could compromise statements and interfere with the investigation.

“The interest in justice will not demand that the accused interfere with statements in any manner until the case is finally resolved,” Netshiozwi said.

The magistrate was particularly concerned about Tibana’s position as an executor of deceased estates at the centre of the allegations.

He said her continued appointment as an executor meant she could potentially come into contact with beneficiaries who had allegedly complained about the administration of their estates or provided information to investigators.

The estates identified by the prosecution are:
• Masha Estate — R650,000
• Mathabatha Estate — R1.1 million
• Maswanganyi Estate — R2.75 million
• Moetji Estate — R1.38 million
• Kobe Estate — R800,250

Netshiozwi said the continued ability of an accused person to communicate with beneficiaries in circumstances where criminal investigations were under way presented a serious concern.

He said where beneficiaries had already approached the Master of the High Court with complaints and sought criminal investigations, there was a need to consider whether the accused should continue to act as executor.

The magistrate said the problem went beyond the particular estates forming part of the charges, suggesting that the Master’s Office should consider whether Tibana’s appointment as executor in other estates handled by her firm also required scrutiny.

Netshiozwi’s concerns were reinforced by evidence that Tibana had allegedly been informed in 2024 that an investigation was under way into estate funds connected to her work as an executor.

Despite allegedly knowing about the investigation, the State claims that further offences were committed in 2025 and 2026.

The magistrate said this evidence was relevant not only to the strength of the State’s case but also to the potential risk posed by releasing Tibana and Nonyane.

Alleged Mercedes-Benz transaction

The court also considered the alleged financial dealings between Tibana and Nonyane, who are married.

According to the State’s case, the two allegedly acted together in transactions involving money derived from deceased estates administered by Tibana.

One of the transactions highlighted in court involved an alleged attempt to purchase a R1.650 million pre-owned Mercedes-Benz AMG G63 from McCarthy Mercedes-Benz in Wonderboom, Pretoria.

The State alleges that proceeds from an estate were used in the transaction and that the vehicle was intended to be registered in Nonyane’s name, despite him allegedly not being a beneficiary of the estate and therefore having no entitlement to benefit from its proceeds.

The court further heard allegations that estate money was moved through different bank accounts before ultimately reaching a stokvel account of which Nonyane was a member.

Netshiozwi said the alleged transactions pointed to a possible common purpose between the accused and demonstrated the strength of the State’s case for purposes of the bail application.

Tibana’s experience at Master’s Office

In addition, the magistrate considered Tibana’s professional background.

Before establishing her own legal practice, CT Tibana Attorneys, she had worked at the Master’s Office, where deceased estates are administered, and processes relating to the appointment of executors are handled.

Netshiozwi said her previous employment meant she was familiar with the procedures governing the administration of estates, including the appointment of executors.

The court noted that where an estate exceeds the prescribed threshold, an attorney may be appointed as executor, while the Master of the High Court has powers to revoke an executor’s appointment where circumstances warrant such intervention.

Against this background, Netshiozwi questioned why the Master had not intervened in the estates at the centre of the dispute.

He said such intervention could help prevent Tibana from having contact with beneficiaries while the criminal investigation was continuing.

The issue became particularly significant because Tibana’s defence had acknowledged during the bail proceedings that, if released, her position as an executor would require her to communicate with beneficiaries.

For Netshiozwi, that created precisely the risk the State was seeking to prevent.

The magistrate said allowing Tibana to remain in a position where she could communicate with beneficiaries could create an opportunity to interfere with their statements and potentially frustrate the investigation.

He concluded that the interests of justice did not favour the release of either of the accused.

Nonyane and Tibana will remain in custody and are expected to return to court on 6 November, when the matter continues.