Sevakatini v State [2001] FJHC 240; Criminal Appeal 26.2001 (22 October 2001)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI
AT LABASA
APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 26 OF 2001
(Savusavu Mag. Ct. Crim. Case No. 81 of 2001)

Between:

INOKE SEVAKATINI
Appellant

And

STATE
Respondent

Appellant in Person
Mr. J. Rabuku for the State

JUDGMENT

On 22 March 2001 in the Magistrate’s Court at Savusavu the appellant was on his own plea convicted on the First Count with the offence of house breaking entering and larceny contrary to section 300(a) of the Penal Code and on the Second Count for escaping from lawful custody contrary to section 138 of the Penal Code Cap. 17 and was sentenced to imprisonment for 12 months and one month concurrent respectively.

He has appealed against severity of sentence.

He told the Court that he is a 24 year old single man, his parents are old and he will be looking after them. He says that he realized that he has done wrong and asks to be forgiven and would like the sentence reduced to 9 months.

The learned State Counsel opposing the appeal says that $14,000.00 worth of articles were stolen and only $4000 worth of items were recovered. He said that the law provides 14 years imprisonment for the offence of house breaking entering and larceny. The sentence, he says, is very lenient and it ought to be increased. The appellant has previous convictions for property offences.

The brief facts of the case are as follows (as stated in the Record):

12/12/99 between 5.30 p.m. - 7 p.m. accused entered home of complainant after removing louver blades and removed items mentioned in the charge. Owner of house returned later and found items missing. 5 days after the break-in accused was arrested and escorted to Savusavu Police Station where-from accused escaped. Several attempts to apprehend accused from 1999 until 19/03 when Police finally caught up with him. Arrested and charged.

Also on 17 December 1999 at Savusavu while in the lawful custody of Police Officer Cpl 1516 Indar Deo he escaped.

The appellant has committed a serious offence for which the law provides a severe punishment. The offence of house-breaking entering and larceny is a prevalent offence in the Northern Division. Some valuable possessions of the complainant which included three diamond rings and a pendant were stolen and these were as the appellant admitted sold. After stealing while in lawful custody he escaped after 5 days and was not located until 19 March 2001.

The appellant got away with a very lenient sentence of 12 months imprisonment involving theft of valuable items despite his previous convictions for theft of property. The fact that he was at large for so long does not help him at all for sentencing purposes.

I agree with the learned State Counsel that the sentence of 12 months should be increased. When asked by Court as to why it should not be increased all that the appellant could say was that he wants to be forgiven. The sentence should always be commensurate with the gravity of the offence and this was a grave case. Nothing less than 3 years will suffice in this case.

The sentence I find is neither harsh nor excessive or wrong in principle. It is on the low side and therefore the sentence on the first count is varied by setting it aside and substituting it with one of three years.

D. Pathik
Judge

At Labasa
22 October 2001