He faces charges of possession of a firearm and ammunition without a valid permit.
Among the bail conditions ordered by magistrate Siphiwo Mdyogolo was for Buhlungu, a father of five who employs more than 4,000 staff, to surrender his passport and report to a police station once a week.
He was also ordered not to communicate with state witnesses, not to commit a schedule 1 offence and not leave the magisterial jurisdiction of Mthatha without informing the investigating officer.
Buhlungu was arrested on September 21 for the alleged contravention of the Firearms Control Act following a compliance inspection conducted by the SAPS at the head office of his security company.
Police said the businessman was found in possession of a company firearm without the required permit, constituting a contravention.
He had argued in his bid to be released on bail that his arrest was unlawful, and instead of him being in the dock applying to be released, the police who arrested him should be the ones in the dock.
Making closing arguments on the bail bid, advocate Naso Zilwa said his arrest last week was unlawful.
Zilwa argued on Wednesday that on the evidence before court, the firearm was licensed, had a permit and Buhlungu was authorised to carry it.
He was arrested at 3.55pm on September 21 during an inspection by the police at his premises, while the permit allegedly expired on September 18.
Zilwa said the regulations stated that the holder must immediately surrender the firearm in terms of the law, and immediately, in this case, was the following normal business day.
He said because the permit lapsed on a Saturday, the following normal business day was Monday, and when Buhlungu was arrested, he was still attending to the business of the day.
Zilwa said Buhlungu had not been given an opportunity to surrender the permit or to have a new one issued.
The advocate argued that the state’s case was weak and palpable and “simply does not survive scrutiny”.
“Under these circumstances, what this demonstrates is an unlawful arrest and detention.”
In opposing his release, investigating officer Captain Sina Mnguni said if released on bail, there was a likelihood that Buhlungu would interfere with investigations and influence witnesses.
He further stated that his release would endanger the safety of the public and claimed he had a propensity to commit a schedule one offence, derived from a pending case where Buhlungu allegedly discharged a firearm during a traditional ceremony.
State prosecutor Sisipho Mbambisa argued that the state had a strong case against Buhlungu.
“The state submits that he was in possession of the firearm illegally,” Mbambisa said.
She said the case was “quite unique”, adding that the investigating officer still needed to take statements from Buhlungu’s employees, and that was why the state felt Buhlungu would possibly interfere with witnesses.
Mbambisa said the serious unlawful possession of a firearm could not be seen as trivial.
She said Buhlungu failed to discharge the onus to show his release was in the interest of justice.
Handing down the bail judgment on Thursday, Mdyogolo said Buhlungu did not simply attack the state's case but advanced reasons that showed that the state's case against him was weak.
Mdyogolo said he considered the health status of Buhlungu who said he suffered from a chronic illness.
He also considered that he offered to surrender his passport to allay state fears that he may skip court.
Also, that he was the sole managing director of a company that employed 4,000 staff and continued detention would result in financial prejudice; that his presence in the operation of the business was essential; and that he had no previous convictions and had established ties within the district.
He said that Buhlungu being directly involved in the operation of the business took away the risk of absconding.
"This factor weighs in his favour," Mdyogolo said, adding that this should be taken in consideration with other factors.
He said that Buhlungu having a pending case did not automatically require the court to refuse him bail.
He said the state must show real and tangible evidence to oppose bail.
No further submission was made that if released on bail, he would interfere with state witnesses.
He said he was satisfied that Buhlungu had discharged the onus that it was in the interest of justice for him to be released on bail.
