State v Prasad [2015] FJMC 67; Criminal Case 1392.14 (22 May 2015)

IN THE MAGISTRATE'S COURT OF SUVA

Criminal Case No: - 1392/14

STATE

vs.

SHALINI DEO PRASAD

For Prosecution: - Ms. Tivao S. ( DPP -Counsel)
Accused: - Mr. Singh S.

SENTENCE

1.You, Shalini Deo Prasad are here today, to be sentenced on admission of guilty on your own accord for the offence of Falsification of document contrary to section 160(3) of the Crime Decree 2009.

SHALINI DEO PRASAD between the 9th day of September 2012 and the 12th day of October 2012 at Suva in the Central Division knowingly made a false statement in an application for a passport and caused the said application form to be given to the Immigration Department of Fiji, a government entity.

2. According to the summery of facts tendered by the Prosecution which you admitted in open court, Shalini Deo the accused person was working as a travel agent at the time of the offence. The accused person operated from the office of Mr. Raman Pratap Singh, a lawyer.On 9th October 2012 the accused person was approached by a man who she had known for some time as Zhang Chiks also known as Lo Kinho. The accused person informed this Mr. Chiks that she was able to assist in the making of passport. The accused person informed Mr. Chiks on the requirements in an application for a passport which were 2 passport size photos, original birth certificate and identification.A few days later Mr. Chiks brought an application form for a passport to the accused person. Paragraph 22 of the form which is the witnessing portion was signed by a person who had not certified the passport photos of the applicant.The accused person then eased the witness name and used the stamp of Mr. Raman Singh and forged his signature on the application form for passport on paragraph 22 which states as follows. The accused person also certified the photo of the applicant. The accused person and Mr. Raman Singh do not know the applicant. The accused person then submitted the application form to a relative who was working at the Immigration Department, a government entity for the passport application to the processed. The Immigration Department on the basis of the application form issued a passport to the applicant. The accused person was interviewed under caution and gave her answers voluntarily whereby she admitted to forging the signature of Mr. Raman Singh on the application form in question and answer 30 as attached.

3. As per the section 160 (3) of the Crime Decree 2009, the maximum sentence could be imposed against the said offence of falsification of Document is for seven years imprisonment. In the case of State v Rokotavaga [2010] FJMC Criminal Case 571.2010 (5 July 2010) the Court at Paragraph 4 stated that "According to the Section 160(3) of the Crimes Decree 2009, the maximum sentence could be imposed against you for the said offence of falsification of Document is for seven years imprisonment." And the court imposed suspended sentence of 3 years.

4. The offence which you have committed is a serious crime in the society. This court based on your plea of guilt convicts you for 1 count of falsification of Document.

5. Accordingly, this court selects 24 months imprisonment as a starting point of sentencing.

6. In your Mitigation you have said that Accused is 36 years of age, single and lives with her parents and a brother at 265 Gagi Road. The Accused is currently unemployed but has her own Visa Consultancy in which she is the Director and does some work to support her elderly parents who she lives with. At the moment all work in the consultancy has seized pending the outcome of this case. The parents of the accused are dependent on her to support them in household chores. The Accused is remorseful and seeks the forgiveness. The Accused promises that she will never re-offend. The Accused has pleaded guilty at the earliest possible time and has accordingly saved the Courts time from proceeding to hearing of the matter. She seeks the leniency of Court in passing its sentence for the Accused. The accused stating she is a first offender and has no previous convictions. Further added that accused has realized the consequences of her actions which happened in the spur of the moment and she regrets what she has done.

7. Since you have pleaded guilty in the first available instance you are entitle for a reduction of 1/3 of the total period of imprisonment. ( Akili Vilimone v State (Cr. App. HAA 131/2007). Thereby your sentence now stands for 18 months imprisonment for the count 01.
8. In your mitigation, you explained the circumstance surrounding committing of the said offences. You seek mercy and forgiveness of the court and second chance to reform your life.

9. Accordingly, I sentence you for 18 months imprisonment for the of offence of Falsification of document contrary to section 160(3) of the Crime Decree 2009, and due to mitigation suspended them for a period of 3 years.

10. If you commit any crime during the period of 3 years and found guilty by the court you are liable to be serve the above mentioned imprisonment period consecutively to next sentence which is suspended by this court irrespective of sentencing date of said next case.

11. 28 days to appeal.

On this 22nd day of May 2015.

Neil Rupasinghe
Resident Magistrate, Suva.