State v Deo [2011] FJHC 439; HAC002.2010 (5 August 2011)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI
AT SUVA
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

HIGH COURT CRIMINAL CASE NO.: HAC 002 OF 2010

BETWEEN:

STATE
PROSECUTION

AND:

SACHIN DEO
ACCUSED PERSON

Counsels: Ms. Prasad. J for State
Accused in Person

Date of Inquiry: 4th August 2011
Date of Ruling: 5th August 2011

RULING ON VOIR DIRE

[1] The accused is charged with one count of unlawful possession of illicit drugs and with one count of unlawful cultivation of illicit drugs.

[2] The accused challenges the admissibility of his caution interview statement made to the Police on 30/12/2009. The accused is unrepresented and he challenges the said statement stating that it was not made voluntarily.

[3] The burden of proving that the statement was obtained voluntarily and without oppression is on the prosecution. The burden is also on the prosecution to prove that the statement was obtained without any breaches of his rights and if there were any breaches, there was no resulting prejudice to the accused. The standard of proof is that of beyond reasonable doubt.

[4] The State called 4 witnesses to give evidence.

Police Officer Sailasa Bolatagia has conducted the raid at accused persons' house on 30/12/2009. He has shown the search warrant to the accused and had informed him that they received information that the accused was selling drugs. Accused had spoken in English language. After searching they have found the drugs under the bed of accused's mother. They also have found some money. He said that Constable Jona found the drugs and he found the money. They had taken accused to CID Headquarters for the questioning.

[5] He said that accused made no complaint on the raid and that he spoke English throughout the raid. In cross examination accused suggested that the Police officer threatened to assault him if he did not admit. Witness denied the allegation.

[6] PC 3668 Jona who participated in the raid said that he with another officer covered the back yard of the house and another two officers searched the house. After finding 6 maruana plants in the back yard he too had gone inside the house to search. He has witnessed the recording of caution interview statement of accused. He identified the signatures and said that accused did not make any complaint. He further said that he did not assault, threaten or induce the accused.

[7] Police officer Aiyaz Ali who recorded the charge statement of the accused giving evidence said that the accused preferred English language. He had given all the rights to the accused he said. Charge statement was produced and the accused had remained silent and had not made any statement on the charge. Accused suggested that he was forced in taking the charge statement, which the witness denied.

[8] The last witness was D/Sgt. Simione Ravouvou who recorded the caution interview statement of the accused. He said that he gave the rights to the accused and that the accused answered the questions voluntarily. Accused suggested that he was forced at the interview which the witness denied.

[9] Accused giving sworn evidence said that the drugs found in his house belong to somebody else. He said that he got frightened and scared when Police arrested him. He also said that the Police officers threatened him in the vehicle that he would be taken to a military camp. Showing his stomach where old scars of injuries were visible, he said that those injuries were made by a military officer when he was drunk and that he got scared when he was told that he would be taken to a military camp.

[10] In cross-examination he said that he can understand and also speak English. He admitted that the allegation of threatening to take to a military camp was not put to the prosecution witness. In that he said he is not familiar with the court procedures. He admitted that he told the truth in the caution interview statement. He further admitted that interview was conducted fairly. However he again said the answers he gave in the interview is not the truth.

[11] All Police officers testified that the accused was not oppressed and that his rights were given. The allegation put to the witness by the accused was that he was threatened and forced to admit. However in cross examination he admitted that the caution interview was conducted fairly.

[12] At the time when this Voir dire Inquiry was started the accused said that he understands English. In cross-examination too he said that he understands and can speak English. However he changed his position later and said that he doesn't know difficult words in English.
[13] He put to the witnesses who conducted the charge that he was forced in taking his charge statement. However he has not made any statement in reply to the charges put to him.

[14] Having heard all the evidence and having seen the demeanor of the witnesses, I find that the evidence of the Police officers that the accused was not oppressed, can be believed. I find that the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was not assaulted, oppressed or ill-treated by Police officers on 30/12/2009 and that the caution interview statement was made voluntarily. I also find that the accused was given all his rights by the Police.

[15] Hence I find the caution interview statement to be admissible.

Priyantha Fernando
JUDGE

At Suva
05/08/2011.