An Umhlanga doctor and his wife, each released on R30 000 bail late on Friday night, were involved in the running and managing of a building they owned in the Point area that police allege was used as a brothel.
They were there on a daily basis and during peak season, sometimes twice a day, State advocate Val Dafel revealed during an urgent application brought by the couple’s legal counsel for their immediate release.
The application was heard at 6pm in Judge Dhaya Pillay’s chambers at Durban High Court.
After their arrest last Thursday night, Dr Genchen Rugnath and his wife Ravina, appeared in the Durban Magistrate’s Court the next morning to face 42 charges – 18 relating to human trafficking and others involving keeping a brothel; facilitating prostitution; accepting proceeds from unlawful activities and for causing or allowing money (that are proceeds of prostitution, keeping a brothel and dealing in drugs) to be used for payment of rent and expenses for rooms at the Inn Town Holiday Lodge in Rochester Street, Point.
On February 16 police conducted a raid, said to be the biggest in KwaZulu-Natal against human trafficking, at the Lodge. It led to the arrest of four people. Twenty- two girls and women, ranging in age from 14 to 26, were rescued and sent to a place of safety.
Three men – Sandile Zweni, 37; Nonduzo Dlamini, 23; and Bhabha Dubazani, 29 – appeared in the Durban Magistrate’s Court earlier this month and their bail application, which the State is opposing, is scheduled for April 25.
The fourth accused Urmila Budram, who allegedly worked at the brothel as its manager, has now turned State witness.
The couple’s advocate Paul Jorgensen, argued before acting magistrate L Matjele for a bail application to be heard on the same day, saying the couple had been liaising with the State, through their lawyer Andrew Johnstone, after the raid and before they left for Mauritius on March 4 with their son.
Jorgensen said prior to their departure, they established they were not suspects and there was no warrant for their arrest.
He said the couple only learnt of the warrant through media reports on March 27 while they were in Mauritius. They cut short their holiday and returned to South Africa with their son.
Jorgensen read out two pieces of correspondence with the State saying the Rugnaths did not flee the country, and that a meeting with the State had been scheduled beforehand for March 27.
He said they intended to co-operate fully and would hand themselves over to police if required.
The second letter, dated March 29, read that Dafel indicated she would not be able to conduct a bail application, which the State intended to oppose, on Friday, March 30 as the court rolls were heavy.
Johnstone wrote that he tried to hand over the couple’s passports but Dafel declined to take them. Their concern was that the police would arrest the couple and they requested 48 hours’ notice.
Jorgensen said he found it strange that if the husband and wife were a flight risk, they were not arrested at the airport but two days later. He argued that they should have been arrested when the State was ready to proceed with a bail application.
Dafel argued that the State could not proceed with a bail application as it still needed to investigate recent unconfirmed reports alleging that Dr Rugnath had taken a girl or girls to Mauritius and that the couple were trying to dispose of records from the Lodge.
Passports
She said she could not instruct the police when to arrest the couple and also could not accept the passports as she was not a police officer.
Dafel said the Rugnaths were not found at their Umhlanga home but at a hotel.
The magistrate said the arrests were properly conducted and granted an adjournment until April 10 for the State to obtain a certificate from the Attorney-General’s office stating that it was a schedule six (the onus is on the accused to prove exceptional circumstances for them being granted bail) bail application.
He said it would be decided on that date if a bail application would be heard. The couple were then sent to Westville Prison.
This led to the urgent high court application contesting the arrest, at which advocates Jorgensen and Jimmy Howse argued the magistrate granted more than a seven-day adjournment and detaining the couple until that time was “unlawful”. They called for the Rugnaths to be released immediately.
Dafel told Judge Pillay that 22 women, all from SA, had been employed as sex workers and had been rescued.
“They were forced to take drugs, become addicted, and as a result work as prostitutes to support themselves and their addiction.
“They received R20 to R25 a day for food and their earnings were given to the first three accused who then used this money to pay rent to the doctor and his wife, the owners of the building,” said Dafel.
“The doctor and his wife were there on a daily basis and twice a day during peak season. They were involved in the management and running of the place and could be involved in possible racketeering,” she said.
“Some of the girls have been at the place since 2000. A witness said if the police conducted raids the doctor would say, ‘Sort it out’ to the management as they had contacts within the police.”
New evidence that the doctor was possibly taking a girl or girls to Mauritius came from a victim who had consulted a different advocate. Dafel said this information needed to be verified.
She submitted that the magistrate had applied his mind to the matter and followed due process. “I find this relief sought surprising as the accused want to be released pending a bail application. It doesn’t make sense.”
Judge Pillay agreed to grant Genchen and Ravina Rugnath R30 000 bail each, with conditions – they have to report daily to Durban North police station; have to be at their home between 6pm and 6am unless otherwise arranged with the police; they are not to be within 1km of the Lodge; they are to surrender their passports; they are ordered not to communicate with State witness Urmila Budram, not to interfere with the investigation and to submit to a search of Rugnath’s surgery. - Daily News