State v Nadruguca [2004] FJHC 258; HAC0030X.2004S (5 November 2004)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI
AT SUVA
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL CASE NO: HAC0030 OF 2004S

STATE

v.

SAVENACA NADRUGUCA

Hearing: 3rd November 2004
Ruling: 5th November 2004

Counsel: Ms L. Chandra for State
Accused in Person

RULING ON BAIL PENDING TRIAL

On the 14th of September 2004, the Applicant who is charged with rape, was refused bail by this court. He was refused bail on the basis that the alleged victim, who is 7 years old, lives not far from the Applicant, on the ground of his previous failure to respect his bail conditions and of his inability to provide cash bail.

On the 28th of October, he made a second application for bail, this time on the ground that the conditions of his custody were inhumane and degrading. I adjourned the bail hearing to the 2nd of November to allow State counsel to respond. She did so, by filing the affidavit of Aisea Taoka, the Commissioner of Prisons. That affidavit states that from the 18th of August to the 28th of October 2004 the Applicant was accommodated in the main cell block. On the 28th of October he was transferred to the dormitory (Sacau) within the prison complex. The dormitory has 4 large windows, the building has no leaks and is well-ventilated, each prisoner has bunk-style accommodation and the dormitory has toilets and sinks. Further the remand prisoners have access to proper facilities to have meals in the dormitory and are also given time outside the dormitory daily.

Having seen the Applicant’s former accommodation at the Korovou Prison, during my visit to the prison on the 5th of October 2004, I consider that I would have had no choice but to grant bail to him had he remained there. This is in accordance with my reasoning in State v. Eugene Ladpeter HAC0019 of 2004S and State v. Senijieli Boila & Another HAC0032 of 2004S.

However he is now in humane accommodation. He himself agrees that the dormitory is more comfortable than the cells but complains of the noise. He states that he cannot prepare for trial in the dormitory.

The Applicant is unlikely to surrender to custody if granted bail. He is in no position to provide cash bail and the alleged victim is 7 years old. His trial commences in February 2005.

In these circumstances I consider that despite the Applicant’s complaints about the dormitory, the conditions of his custody do not outweigh the consideration that he is unlikely to surrender to custody.

For these reasons bail is refused. However it is refused on the basis that I have accepted State counsel’s assurance (on the basis of the assurance of the Officer-in-Charge of the Korovou Prison) that the Applicant will remain in the dormitory until his trial.

Nazhat Shameem
JUDGE

At Suva
5th November 2004