State v Donu [2010] FJMC 61; Criminal Case 414 of 2007 (8 June 2010)

IN THE MAGISTRATE'S COURT AT LAUTOKA

Criminal case No 414/07

BETWEEN

THE STATE

AND

KAMINIELI DONU

SENTENCE

1. You Kaminieli donu are to be sentenced upon pleading guilty to the charge of Robbery with violence contrary to Section 293(1)(a) of the Penal Code.
   
2. The maximum punishment for this offence is life imprisonment. In this case I pick my starting point as 7 years.
   
3. It was revealed that you with others on the 19th June 2007 between 12pm and 12.30 pm robbed the complainant's cash, assorted cigarettes and assorted recharge cards all to the total value of 6672 dollars. You with the others have forcibly opened the back door and entered in to the complainant's shop. You and the others have entered the shop armed with pinch bars. When the complainant tried to stop you from entering, the complainant was assaulted with a pinch bar. The complainant received injuries and you with the others have then robbed the above items.
   
4. It appears that you have committed this offence during the day time. Further you have been armed with pinch bars. The courts have always treated this kind of violent actions in a serious manner. The prevalence of robberies in the society has become a menace and people find it difficult even to do their lawful businesses peacefully without a fear. Secondly if members of the public can not at least engage in activities during the day time in their own premises, that is a serious concern and the court has to look at it in a serious manner. Thus the court has a duty to impose deterrent sentences in violent offences of this nature.
   
5. In this case I have observed the following grievous features.
   
   1. Offence is a well planned one
      
   2. Offence is committed by a gang of men
      
   3. Offenders were armed with pinch bars
      
   4. Have entered a shop by forcibly opening a back door
      
   5. The complainant is assaulted with pinch bars and was injured.
      
   6. Substantial worth of property is stolen
      
   7. No properties were recovered
      
6. For the aggravating circumstances I enhance the sentence by 18 months.
   
7. The accused did not say anything in mitigation. He was explained his right to mitigate and the reasons for mitigation. Yet the accused opted not to mitigate.
   
8. It should be noted that the accused does not seem to be remorseful of his actions. However I decide to take in to consideration some other factors which were transpired which could be considered as mitigatory circumstances. It was informed that you do not have previous convictions. I am mindful of the fact that you are still at your young age. You pleaded guilty saving the time of this court although it cannot be called a timely plea. I l also consider the time that you spent in remand prison in sentencing.
   
9. For the mitigatory circumstances I reduce the sentence by 9 months.
   
10. Accordingly I impose a 7 years and nine months imprisonment. You are eligible for parole after 72 months.
    

28 days to appeal.

Rangajeeva Wimalasena
Resident Magistrate

Lautoka.
08.06.2010