Kumar v The State [1995] FJHC 2; Haa0003j.1995b (7 February 1995)

Fiji Islands - Arun Kumar v The State - Pacific Law Materials

IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI

AT LABASA

APPELLATE JURISDICTION

ass=MsoNormal alal align=center style="text-align: center; margin-top: 1; margin-bottom: 1"> CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 3 OF 1995

Between:

ARUN KUMAR

s/o Ram Sumer

Appellant

-and-

STATE

Respondent

For Appe :Mr. A. Sen

For Respondent :Miss Laisa Laveti

ass=MsoNormal alal align=center style="text-align: center; margin-top: 1; margin-bottom: 1"> JUDGMENT

On 11 November 1994 at the Magistrate's Court, Labasa the appellant wasr trial convicted for the othe offence of indecently annoying female contrary to section 154(4) of the Penal Code. He was senteto imprisonmenonment for 9 months and also ordered to pay $30.00 Court costs.

He has appealed st the sentence of imprisonment stating that it is & "unreasonable".

BIR MATI d/o Jay Mal "indecently annoyed her by forcefully kissing her on the mouth".

Mr. Sen submitted that the appellant who is 30 years of age is a first offender, marriedrried with four children who all attend school. He is in regular empnt andt and is a farm manager. ys that this is a relativeatively minor offence and binding over would have been sufficient. Thtence is harsh and excesexcessive. The appellant has already served three months and present serving extramuralmurally and is due for release on 10 March 1995, that is, in a month's time.

Tarned State counsel agrees that the sentence is excessive bearing in mind that it is a misd misdemeanour and the maximum sentence is one year's imprisonment. Tpellant is in regular empr employment and is a first offender. ourt's powers are set out out under s319 of the Criminal Procedure Code. She feels that the see ouge ought to be reduced.

I haad the record of proceedings in this case and consider this to be a single out of chaf character offence committed by the appellant for which the maximum sentence is 12 months' imprisonment. The circumstances not seri serious. The appellanterving extramxtramurally and will be discharged within a month which goes to show that it is safe to let him loose now.

With learned State counsel not opposing the appeal, in all the circumstances of this case I also consider that the sentence is on the high side for this type offence and therefore a reduction in sentence is justified. Whilst doing appreciate thte that each case depends on its own particular facts and circumstances for no two cases are alike in all respectsan>

I therefore set aside the sentence of 9 months' imprisonment and substitute it with a sentence of 3 months' imprisonment effective from the date of his original sentence namely 11 November 1994 so that the appellant will be due for his release on 11 February 1995. I do not disturb ther as t as to costs.

D. PATHIK

PUISNE JUDGE

At Labasa

<1"> 7th February, 1995

Haa0003j.95b