Home
| Databases
| WorldLII
| Search
| Feedback
High Court of Fiji |
IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI
AT SUVA
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL CASE NO. HAC 302 OF 2016S
STATE
Vs
KELEPI LEDUA
Counsels : Ms L. Bogitini for State
Mr. A. Qetaki for Accused
Hearings : 2 and 16 March, 2018
Sentence : 20 April, 2018
SENTENCE
COUNT ONE
Statement of Offence
AGGRAVATED BURGLARY: Contrary to Section 313 (1)(a) of the Crimes Act 2009.
Particulars of Offence
KELEPI LEDUA & ANOTHER, on the 7th day of August, 2016 at Suva, in the Central Division, equipped with 1 x pinch bar, 1 x malt hammer and 1 x axo blade, broke into Bargain Saver Shop with intent to commit theft therein.
COUNT TWO
Statement of Offence
THEFT: Contrary to Section 291 (1) of the Crimes Act 2009
Particulars of Offence
KELEPI LEDUA & ANOTHER, on the 7th day of August, 2016 at Suva, in the Central Division, stole $30,000.00 FJD and $30,000.00 AUD (equivalent to $45,744.00 FJD) all to the total sum of $75, 744.00 FJD, the property of Bargain Saver Shop with the intention of permanently depriving the said Bargain Saver Shop of the property
COUNT THREE
Statement of Offence
DAMAGING PROPERTY: Contrary to Section 369 (1) of the Crimes Act 2009.
Particulars of Offence
KELEPI LEDUA & ANOTHER, on the 7th day of August, 2016 at Suva, in the Central Division, wilfully and unlawfully damaged the ceiling valued at $100 and the safe locker valued at $20,000.00, all to the total value of $20,100.00, the property of Tebara Halal Meat.
COUNT FOUR
Statement of Offence
RESISTING ARREST: Contrary to Section 277 (b) of the Crimes Act 2009.
Particulars of Offence
KELEPI LEDUA on the 7th day of August, 2016 at Suva, in the Central Division, resisted Police Constable 4923 Kaminieli whilst effecting arrest in the due execution of his duty.
into the Bargain Saver Shop at Tebara Halal Meat Building located at 52-54 Usher Street Suva. The accused and his accomplice had been planning to break into the aforementioned shop two weeks before that.
broke into the Bargain Saver Shop by cutting the external side of the window grill of the Bargain Saver Shop. The accused and accomplice had used theft implements which included I pinch bar, 1 malt hammer and 1 axo blade to break into the shop. The accused was to be the watchman who was to keep a lookout while the accomplice went into the shop to steal.
ransacked the Bargain Saver Shop and opened the wooden locker of the Bargain Saver Shop. The accomplice of the accused then took $30,000 Australian Dollars (which was equivalent to $45,744.00 Fijian Dollars) and $30,000 Fijian Dollars. The accused was given a portion of the money.
floor of the Bargain Saver Shop which was also the ceiling of the Tebara Halal Meat Shop. The damages to the ceiling of the Tebara Meat Hal Shop amounted to $100.00 in costs. The accomplice then attempted to open the locker safe of Tebara Halal Meat which led to the locker safe getting damaged. The cost of the damaged locker for the safe was $20,000.00. Following this, the theft implements were then left at the Suva Bargain Saver Shop.
he received a report from an unknown person at around 11.45pm about suspicious activity at an Usher street building. PC Kaminieli along with PC 3380 Aklesh went to investigate the building at Usher Street when they saw the accused and the accomplice holding a white bag and an identified object. PC Aklesh called out for them to stop, but they both ran towards Tapoos city, the accused fell down as the concrete footpath was wet due to the rain while the accomplice continued to run away. The accused then challenged PC Kaminieli to a fight. PC Kaminieli managed to cuff the accused hands with the assistance of a security officer based at Tapoo City by the name of Sailasa Regunamada. Upon reaching the Suva market post the police officers searched the accused and found a total of $AUD 19,200 and $FJD 6, 617 cash that was in his possession.
white bag containing a cutter, pinch bar, malt hammer and axo blade under bed sheets at the Suva Bargain Saver Shop.
Totogo Police Station. During the interview the accused was given breaks to rest, have his meals and visit the Nasese force Medical Centre. Also during the caution interview there was scene reconstruction. There was no threat, promise, or inducement made to the accused when he was in police custody. The accused gave his statement of his own free will.
Q80: What time did you wake up?
Answer: No, I was about to sleep when one Puamau Luvu called Pauliasi Namulo on his mobile phone for me to come to town and do one job.
Q 81 What job did you mean?
Answer: To break into one shop in Suva
Q82: How did Puamau Luvu know that you was at Pauliasi Namulo’s house?
Answer: He already know that we will do this job and he knew that we will be waiting for him there.
Q83: Where did you plan to do this job?
Answer: I met Puamau Luvu two weeks ago in Suva town where we plan to do this job?
Q91: Which shop did you go and break into?
Answer: The second hand clothes upstairs along Usher Street opposite Suva Market.
Q92: How did you two enter the shop?
Answer: The place was dark we entered from the front of the shop, Puamau Luvu climbed to the top then I passed him the whole white bag containing the bolt cutter, pinch bar.
Q93: Where did you get the bolt cutter and the pinch bar?
Answer: He brought it with him when I met him he was holding the bag containing the bolt cutter and the pinch bar.
Q94: How did you know that it was inside the bag?
Answer: Because we had planned for it.
Q95: What is your role in that shop break in?
Answer: Watchman
Q105: How much was your share?
Answer: I did not know as the money was wrapped in a rubber band and I could feel that it was a big amount as the bundle was very thick.
Q106: How many bundles of money that Puamau gave you?
Answer: I could not recall only I could say that it was many.
Q107: What happened after that?
Answer: Whilst we shared the money the police came towards us.
Q112: Why did you two run?
Answer: Because the police officers are chasing us.
Q117: According to police officer namely Kaminieli that when you was arrested you then challenged him for a fight and also resisting arrest?
What can you say about that?
Answer: Yes I admitted.
“..."Aggravated burglary” carried a maximum sentence of 17 years imprisonment (section 313 (1) of the Crimes Decree 2009). In the repealed Penal Code, Chapter 17, “burglary” carried a maximum sentence of life imprisonment (section 299 of Penal Code). In Viliame Gukisuva v The State, Criminal Appeal No. HAA 117 of 2007, High Court, Suva, Her Ladyship Madam Justice N. Shameem, held that the tariff for burglary was a sentence between 2 to 3 years imprisonment.
“Theft” carried a maximum sentence of 10 years imprisonment [section 291 (1) of Crimes Decree 2009]. In the repealed Penal Code, Chapter 17, “simple theft” carried a maximum penalty of 5 years imprisonment; however, if the person had been previously convicted of a felony, the maximum penalty was 10 years imprisonment (section 259 (1) and 262 of the Penal Code). In Navitalai Seru vs The State, Criminal Appeal No. HAA 84 and 85 of 2002S, Her Ladyship Madam Justice Shameem said as follows:
“...the maximum sentence for simple larceny is (on a second conviction) 10 years imprisonment. The tariff, on a first conviction under section 259 and 262 of the Penal Code, is two months to nine months imprisonment (Paula Bale vs The State, Criminal Appeal No. 27 of 1998, Pauliasi Nadali vs The State, Criminal Appeal No. 29 of 1998, Iowane Wainiqolo vs The State, Criminal Appeal No. 44, 45 of 1998, Ronald Vikash Singh Criminal Appeal No. HAA 035 of 2002). It is logical, that on a second conviction the tariff is doubled to four months to 18 months imprisonment, because the statutory maximum increases from five to ten years. I accept this as a tariff in cases of second convictions for larceny...”
In State vs Jona Saukilagi, Criminal Case No. HAC 21 of 2004S, Her Ladyship further said as follows:
“...Stealing from the bank is a serious matter. The tariff for simple larceny on first conviction is 2 – 9 months (Ronald Vikash vs State, HAA 035 of 2002) and on second conviction a sentence in excess of 9 months. In cases of the larceny of large amounts of money sentences of 1 ½ years imprisonment (Isoa Codrokadroka vs State Criminal Appeal No. 67 of 2002) and 3 years imprisonment have been upheld by the High Court (Sevanaia Via Koroi vs The State, Criminal Appeal No. HAA 031 of 2001S). Much depends on the value of the money stolen, and the nature of the relationship between victim and defendant. The method of stealing is also relevant...”
One could see from the above authorities that the accepted tariff for “theft” is a sentence between 2 months to 3 years, depending on the circumstances and facts of the case. However, the actual sentence in the case will depend on the aggravating and mitigating factors...”
.
Salesi Temo
JUDGE
Solicitor for State : Office of the Director of Public Prosecution, Suva
Solicitor for Accused : Office of the Legal Aid Commission, Suva.
PacLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.paclii.org/fj/cases/FJHC/2018/330.html