Prasad v Reginam [1977] FJSC 117; Criminal Appeal 98 of 1977 (30 September 1977)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FIJI
APPELLATE JURISDICTION

Criminal Appeal No. 98 of 1977

JAI PRASAD
s/o Ram Samuj
Appellant

v

REGINAM
Respondent

The appellant was jointly charged with another person with Storeroom breaking and Larceny contrary to section 333(a) of the Penal Code. They were both convicted by the Magistrate's Court Suva and each sentenced to 15 months' imprisonment.

The appellant appeals against his conviction and sentence.

The following facts were not in dispute:

Two sprockets valued at $250 each were stolen from a storeroom at Nasinu belonging to Marlows Limited. They were transported on the appellant's truck and left in the backyard of one Shiu Govind's house at Waila, Nausori. The other accused, Freddy McPherson, made a statement to the police admitting that he had stolen the sprockets from the storeroom at the instigation of the appellant and had merely placed them on the latter's truck at Nasinu. He had, some days later, received $36 from the appellant. He had not gone with him in the truck. At the trial he admitted that the statement he had made to the police was correct.

Shiu Govind, a tractor operator, stated that he was not at home when the sprockets were left at his house but when he was told about them by his people he went to see the appellant. According to him,

"He (appellant) told me that he had dropped two sprockets at my house and the value of them was $200. He told me to give him the money and keep the sprockets ...... He told me that he had bought them from Marlows Limited, that he had not stolen them."

Shiu Govind, according to his evidence, was not sure that the appellant had bought the sprockets and made certain enquiries from an engineer employed by Marlows Limited. The sprockets were later removed from Shiu Govind's house by the police.

The appellant's evidence was that he acted merely as an innocent carrier at McPherson's order who paid him for the cartage, that he did not know what was in the sacking which McPherson had placed on his truck, that it was McPherson who had left the package at Shiu Govind's house. Both Shiu Govind and McPherson denied that they had ever met or known each other.

The learned Magistrate was, on this evidence, left in no doubt that the appellant was anything but an innocent carrier. Though he did not treat Shiu Govind as an accomplice, he, nevertheless, gave himself the necessary warning while scrutinising his evidence.

The appellant's appeal against conviction is dismissed. The sentence of 15 months' imprisonment for an organised crime of this nature is neither excessive nor wrong in principle. The appeal against sentence, therefore, is also dismissed.

(Sgd.) (G. Mishra)
Acting Chief Justice

Suva,
30th September 1977