State v Mara - Judgment [2000] FJHC 187; Criminal Case 2.2000 (31 August 2000)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI
AT SUVA
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 2 OF 2000

STATE

V

APOROSA MARA
MAHEN LAL s/o Hari Lal

Mr. R. Schuster for the State
Accused in person

JUDGMENT

ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE:
Contrary to Section 293(1) (b) of the Penal Code, Cap.17

The summary of facts and directions as to the law contained in the Summing-up delivered this morning apply equally to this judgment. The assessors have returned an unanimous opinion of guilt on the charge of robbery with violence.

I find the prosecution witnesses to be impressive witnesses. Although the accused conducted his own defence with guidance from the Court, none of the prosecution witnesses were shaken in cross-examination in any way particularly on material issues.

The decision in this case rests, as I said in my summing-up, essentially on proper identification of the accused. The accused was properly identified as a person involved in the offence with which he is charged.

Apart from prosecution evidence there is the evidence of defence witnesses. They are accused’s sister Salote and his parents . No doubt they would not like to see the accused going to prison and it appears that they were attempting to give as favourable an evidence as possible. I find that in the process there were discrepancies of a material nature in regard to his movement of the morning in question. This did not put the accused in a favourable light. It only strengthened the prosecution case and corroborated the testimony of the prosecution witnesses. Although there is no onus on the accused, his witnesses’ have failed to raise a reasonable doubt as to his guilt.

I find myself in complete agreement with the unanimous opinion of the Assessors. I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of the accused’s guilt on the charge of robbery with violence.

I find him guilty as charged and convict him accordingly.

D. Pathik
Judge

At Suva
31 August 2000