Two brothers jailed, R7-million gone: Free State farming company's long wait for justice ends
Alexis du Preez gets an effective 15 years and Petrus du Preez an effective five, after convictions on 48 counts tied to money moved out of Granu Trading's account between 2017 and 2018.
Two brothers were sentenced to effective prison terms on 26 October 2026 for a fraud that cost a Free State farming company about R7-million, closing a case that began with transfers out of a company bank account in 2017 and 2018.
Alexis “Lex” du Preez, 54, was sentenced to an effective 15 years and Petrus “Rastie” du Preez, 50, to an effective five years by the Bethlehem Commercial Crimes Court. Magistrate Collin Nekosie convicted them on 20 counts of fraud, eight counts of forgery, eight counts of uttering and 12 counts of money laundering.
The company at the centre of the case is Granu Trading, which Alexis du Preez co-owned with the complainant. According to the Hawks, Alexis du Preez conducted several transactions in which money was moved from the company’s bank account into his personal account, and on some occasions into his brother’s account. The Hawks put the complainant’s financial loss at approximately R7-million.
“The brothers were sentenced on 26 October 2026, following their conviction on various counts relating to the offences,” Hawks spokesperson in the Free State, Warrant Officer Fikiswa Matoti, said. “Alexis Du Preez was a co-owner of a company with the complainant. During the period in question, he unlawfully conducted several transactions in which funds were transferred from the company’s bank account into his personal bank account. On some occasions, funds were also transferred into his brother’s bank account. The fraudulent activities resulted in the complainant suffering a financial loss of approximately R7-million.”
Matoti said the complainant reported the transactions to police after noticing them, and the matter was referred to the Hawks’ Serious Commercial Crime Investigation team in Bethlehem. “The investigation resulted in the arrest of the two brothers, who were ultimately convicted on charges of fraud, forgery, uttering and money laundering,” she said.
The provincial head of the Hawks in the Free State, Major-General Mokgadi Bokaba, applauded the investigating officer for the work that produced the investigation and prosecution.
For a farming company, R7-million is not an abstract figure. It is working capital, the money that covers inputs, seasonal wages and the credit a producer leans on between planting and payment. A loss of that size lands on a business, on the people it employs and on the suppliers who extend terms to it, and it is the reason the Hawks’ commercial crime units in the provinces give company-account fraud their attention.
The route the case took is also the ordinary one for commercial crime in South Africa. A business notices money leaving an account, reports it to the police, and the docket is referred to the Hawks’ Serious Commercial Crime Investigation team, which has offices in the provinces and works with the National Prosecuting Authority. The case then runs through a commercial crimes court, where the counts are split across fraud, forgery, uttering and money laundering because each transfer and each document can carry its own charge. That is how a dispute over company funds becomes a 48-count docket, and how a case that began in 2017 reaches sentencing in 2026.
As Sunday World reported on 29 October 2026, the brothers were jailed for defrauding Free State farmers. The facts of the sentencing, the counts, the amounts and the Hawks’ account are confirmed in the same record this paper has used.
The case is one of a steady stream of commercial crime prosecutions the Hawks bring in the provinces, and the pattern is familiar. Money is moved out of a business account over months, the loss is discovered after the fact, and the complainant carries the cost while the investigation runs. What the sentencing does not do is return the R7-million. The court’s order closes the criminal case. Recovery of the money, where any is possible, is a separate civil question that the criminal record does not answer.
The Enquirer has asked the Hawks whether any assets have been restrained or recovered in the matter and will publish the answer when it comes.

