PacLII Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback

High Court of Fiji

You are here:  PacLII >> Databases >> High Court of Fiji >> 1996 >> [1996] FJHC 20

Database Search | Name Search | Recent Decisions | Noteup | LawCite | Help

Prasad v The State [1996] FJHC 20; Haa0004j.1995b (22 May 1996)

wpe3.jpg (10966 bytes)

Fiji Islands - Sharda Prasad v The State - Pacific Law Materials

IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI

AT LABASA

APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 0004 96

BETWEEN:

SHARDA PRASAD
sbr> s/o Mathura Prasad
Appellant

AND:

TATE
Respondent

Appellant in Person
Ms. L. Laveti for Reent

JUDGMENT

This is an appeal against a sentence of 2 years imprisonment imposedhe appellant in the span> Labasa Magistrate Court after he pleaded guilty to an offence of House Breaking Entering and Larceny.

The brief facts of the case were that on the day in question the appellant whilst passing the complainant's house notice it was unoccupied. He removed two louvre blades and gained entry into the house where he helped himself to some food and stole cash and jewellery to the total value of $490. Nothing has been recovered.

The appellant's grounds of appeal are that the sentis harsh and excessive and imposed without any allowance bece being made for his 'guilty' plea. He also complains that he was tricked by the police into pleading guilty to the offence.

As to this last ground, bearing in mind the appellant's record evious convictions it cannot be said that he was unfamiliariliar with court procedures, furthermore in light of his police interview admissions and his admission of the facts outlined in Court I cannot accept that there was any 'trickery' involved in his unequivocal plea of guilty.

Needless to say no such complaint was made to the learned trial magistrate nor is it consistent with the appellant's plea in mitigation.

As for the harshness of the sentence, of the appellant's 21 previous convictions, six /b>are for House or S or Shop Breaking, so the present offence cannot be said to be in any way 'out-of-character' with the appellant's past offending, furthermore, in two (2) of those prior convictions the appellant was sentenced to 18 months imprisonment. He has learnt little from his past imprisonment and cannot expect any leniency or clemency from the Court.

A custodial sentence in excess of 18 months was well merited in the circumstances, however, in the absence of any record by the learned trial magistrate that he had taken into consideration the appellant's plea of 'guilty', this court is able to mitigate the sentence by a small reduction.

The sentence is accordingly reduced to 18 months impriso with effect from the 21st of December 1995. Subjecubject to such reduction in the sentence the appeal is dismissed.

D.V. Fatiaki
JUDGE

At Labasa,
22nd May, 1996.

Haa0004j.95b


PacLII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback
URL: http://www.paclii.org/fj/cases/FJHC/1996/20.html