State v Aziz [2006] FJMC 19; Criminal Case No 357 of 2006 (6 September 2006)

IN THE RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT
AT SUVA

Criminal Case No. 357 of 2006

STATE

V

MANZOOR AZIZ

Prosecution: Sgt Wilson
Defence: Mr. Vosarogo

JUDGMENT

The accused has been charged with criminal intimidation and resisting arrest under Sections 330 (a) and 247 (b) of the Penal Code.

Particulars are Count 1 – without lawful excuse and with intent to cause alarm he threatened Ashish Chand with a cane knife.

Count 2: After being lawfully arrested by police constable 2429 Singh resisted arrest.

When police tried to get him to the station after arrest by Const. 2429 Sandeep Singh he resisted arrest.

The facts are complainant and sister in count 1 lived in a room where other tenants also occupy rooms similar to a boarding home. Complainant heard noise of door breaking and smashing of bottles on the wall. He peeped from a hole in door and saw accused with beer bottles in hand. Accused and friends were drinking in another room to this prior to this incident.

He later noticed accused standing with a cane knife at his door calling complainant outside and saying, "I will finish you off today." Complainant blocked his door with a gas cylinder and stood on it to look through the window on top of the door. Complainant called the police on (919) and after 20 minutes police came. Police were being sent away when complainant shouted from his window. He didn’t open the door as he was frightened. He came out when police arrived.

He identified the accused as the person with the knife exhibited in court.

In his defence the accused denied threatening with knife. He said knife was in bedroom. He drank beer with friends next door to his room and went to his own room after mid night. He also denied resisting arrest by the constable.

Constable Singh in evidence said he was called by tenant into the house at Amy Street. Complainant called from window and came to him. He noticed the door damaged and broken bottle pieces.

He entered the room of accused and saw him hiding behind the door. He found the knife in the room also. Accused resisted to get inside vehicle so he had to call for assistance of another constable to put him in the police vehicle and get him to the station. The accused also tendered a medical report saying he was assaulted by police at the CPS.

However, they did not contest the caution interview as it was denied. Also assault was not before or during the interview and was admitted to be given voluntary. This assault is being investigated by the police and is subject of another investigation. I therefore make no decision on that issue.

The accused was drinking till after 12 am. The complainant clearly saw him from his door and above from the glass. There was sufficient light in corridor also.

They live next door to each other and I find the accused was positively identified as the person outside complaint’s door that night. The long handle cane knife was also identified by complainant. It belongs to the accused and was recovered from his room.

I find the complainant’s evidence more credible. He was frightened by the actions of the accused and his words "I will finish you off". Also accused resisted arrest when constable Singh tried to get him to the station.

There has been minor inconsistencies in evidence of prosecution such as location of rooms and the knife but it is not such as to go to the guilt of the accused. I do not consider them as creating any suspicion in the prosecution evidence.

I find the prosecution has proved both counts beyond reasonable doubt and the accused is found guilty as charged.

Dated this 6th day of September 2006.

Ajmal Gulab Khan
RESIDENT MAGISTRATE