Judgment No. CCZ 12/14 10 Civil Appeal No. SC 327/12 investigated. Further this was the time of hyperinflation and the police had no resources to look for Muderede. This Court can take judicial notice of the fact that indeed 2008 and 2009 were very difficult years and even the operations of this Court were affected owing to the economic situation then prevailing. It was a situation that affected government and the citizenry at large. In my view that explanation cannot be said to be unreasonable. The delay after 2009 is explained by the fact that the applicant filed criminal complaints against Muderede, Muderede’s wife and other persons involved in the registration of the bond on the two properties. The investigating officer explained the difficult situation he and other officers found themselves. They had two dockets on essentially the same facts. The complainant in the one case was the accused in the other. He explained the pressure that was brought to bear on the Police Officers by the applicant. The applicant made complaints to Police Headquarters and investigations into her complaints were instituted. The dilemma that faced the prosecuting authorities was which case to prosecute first. The applicant wanted the case in which she was complainant to be tried first whilst Muderede was insisting that his complaint be tried first as it was first in time. It was against that background that an agreement was reached between the State, the applicant and Muderede that the applicant’s complaint be tried first and in the event Muderede was convicted, then his complaint would die a natural death, and, if not, the applicant would then stand trial. Indeed Muderede was tried and acquitted. It was when the State then sought to proceed with the prosecution of the applicant that she then filed the application for stay of criminal proceedings. In my view, whilst the State, being dominus litis, should have been more assertive, the reality is that the State was faced with a difficult question given the allegations and counter allegations made by both, as to whom to prosecute first between the two. The