State v Seru - Judgment [2015] FJHC 527; HAC426.2012 (22 June 2015)

THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI
AT SUVA
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

HIGH COURT CRIMINAL CASE NO: HAC 426 of 2012

BETWEEN:

STATE
Prosecution

AND:

MAIKELI SERU
Accused

Dates of Trial: 16th, 17th,18th and 19th June 2015
Date of Summing-Up: 19th June 2015
Date of Judgment: 22nd June 2015

Counsel:
Mr.M. Vosawalefor the State
Mr.P. Tawakefor the Accused

JUDGMENT

[1] The Accused is charged, in the amended information under following two counts:

FIRST COUNT
Statement of Offence

AGGRAVATED BURGLARY: Contrary to section 313 (1) (a) of the Crimes Decree No. 44 of 2009

Particulars of the Offence

MAIKELI SERU and another between the 19thday of March 2011 at Nausori in the Eastern Division, entered into shop of DHARMENDRA PRASAD as a trespasser with intent to steal.

SECOND COUNT
Statement of Offence
THEFT: Contrary to section 291 of the Crimes Decree No. 44 of 2009

Particulars of the Offence

MAIKELI SERU and another between the 19thday of March 2011 and 21st day of March 2011, at Nausori in the Eastern Division, 2 laptops valued $ 300.00, assorted wrist watches valued $ 310.00, assorted shoes valued at $ 310.00, one DVD player valued $ 30.00 and cash $ 125.00, all to the total value of $ 1075.00, the property of DHARMENDRA PRASAD.

[2] The three assessors, in delivering their unanimous opinion, have found accused guilty of the two counts against him.

[3] I direct myself in accordance with the law and the evidence which I discussed in my summing up to the assessors.

[4] Considering the nature of the evidence before the court, I am convinced that the prosecution had proved the case beyond reasonable doubt.

[5] Prosecution case was based on the evidence of the caution statement of the accused, in which he admitted to the commission of offences with which he is charged of, and evidence of Seru Netani who testified that on 20th March 2011 at about 5.00pm, the accused had exchanged a laptop with him, for a carton of beer. Later this laptop was identified by the Complainant Dharmendra Prasad; at Nausori Police Station by its serial number. He had disclosed serial number of the laptop to Police; in making his statement on 21st March 2011, providing descriptions of stolen items, and prior to the discovery of the laptop.

[6] The accused gave evidence, called witnesses on his behalf and took up the position that this is a fabrication by Police and he has an alibi. The assessors have rejected the version of the accused.

[7] I am satisfied that evidence is sufficient to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.

[8] In my view, the assessor's opinion was not perverse. It was open for them to reach such conclusion on the evidence. I concur with the opinion of the assessors.

[9] I find the accused guilty as charged on the count of Aggravated Burglary contrary to Section 313(1)(a)of the Crimes Decree No.44 of 2009, and also on the count of Theft, contrary to section 291 of the Crimes Decree No. 44 of 2009. Accordingly, I convict the accused MAIKELI SERUon both counts against him.

[10] This is the Judgment of Court.

AchalaWengappuli
JUDGE

At Suva
Solicitors:
Director of Public Prosecutions for the State
Legal Aid Commission for the accused