IN THE RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT
AT SUVA

Criminal Case No. 2336 of 2005

STATE

V

RITESH YOGENDRA PRASAD
S/O Rajendra Prasad

Prosecution: Insp. Gosai
Defence: Ms Mua

JUDGMENT

The accused has been charged for assault occasioning actual bodily harm contrary to S245 of the Penal Code.

Particulars are Ritesh Yogendra Prasad on the 2nd day of October 2005 assaulted Seema Singh thereby occasioning her actual bodily harm.

Prosecution evidence is the complainant is divorced from her husband, the accused. On 2nd October 2005 the complainant was at her parent's house with her elderly grandmother and child. It was a Sunday and she was cooking dinner. Accused went to her house drunk. He went inside the house and had argument about sex with the complainant, when she refused him. He then started to assault her. He punched her and she ran outside. He chased her and dragged her inside with her back on the ground. Her back, leg, shoulder was injured.

She was medically examined by a doctor. Her report states injury to scalp, bruised elbow, tender right leg and back area. Diagnosis of injury was consistent with blunt blows". The accused was called for interview but he came after few months when he was free. He was interviewed and charged in December 2005.

In his defence the accused denied the assault. He elected to give sworn evidence.

He said he didn’t recall his whereabouts on 2nd October 2005. He denied assaulting or seeing his wife that day. He exhibited a letter from one corp. Jolame of Nadawa police Post. This letter talks of complaint made to Valelevu Police Station and Nadawa Post about wife of accused trying to commit suicide by overdosing herself with sleeping pills in 2001. Again it says in January 2002 a request was made by the accused against his wife at the police post for threatening to kill her daughter. It says the wife of accused was ‘a trouble maker’ causer’. Corp. Jolame did not give evidence in court on behalf of the accused.

Besides, these are all complaints against the complainant made by the accused in 2001 and 2002. The present case is about assault in 2005. It is hardly relevant. Furthermore, it does little to damage the credibility of the complainant if that’s what is intended, since the complaints are self serving statements made by the accused to the police officer Jolame. It’s unlikely that the complainant would make this complaint and injure herself just to take revenge against her earlier 2001 report.

Upon whole of evidence I find the accused very evasive and not forthright in his answers both in his caution interview and upon oath in court. He says ‘he doesn’t remember his whereabouts on 2/10/05’ but he says he didn’t see his wife on 2/10. He says he wasn’t drunk that day.

Later in evidence he said he recalled that day he was to pick up his daughter from the police station. I find his version difficult to accept.

The complainant’s evidence was credible and supported by medical report. Her injuries were consistent as described by her. I found her to be credible and described the incident from her memory recalled in court without any hesitation.

I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the accused went to the house of the complainant on 2/10/05 and after argument assaulted her causing her actual bodily herm.

The accused is found guilty as charged.

Dated this on the 2nd day of October 2006.

Ajmal Gulab Khan
RESIDENT MAGISTRATE