ZAIn the ongoing tax fraud trial of Durban businessman Thoshan Panday, tensions arose in the Durban High Court over whether a key state witness, Shikar Panday, could testify remotely due to anxiety. The state requested a postponement to consult a physician about his condition, citing Section 158 of the law. However, Acting Judge Vikela Ntlokwana rejected the request, noting that Shikar Panday had already been granted a medical exemption until Monday. Defence lawyer Michael Hellens SC opposed the delay, arguing it violated a prior court order requiring the witness or a medical professional to appear in person. Ultimately, Shikar Panday testified in court, mentioning difficulties with the Pastel accounting software used for tax returns.
Bias read (Center): The article presents a balanced account of both the state's request for remote testimony and the defence's objection to the postponement. It reports the arguments from both sides without overtly favoring one perspective. The judicial decision is described objectively, and there is no clear editorial
