Ragatu v Reginam [1977] FJSC 37; Criminal Appeal 059 of 1977 (30 June 1977)

Fiji Islands - Ragatu v Reginam - Pacific Law Materials

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FIJI

APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 59 of 1977

LARGO RAGATU
Appellant

v

REGINAM
Respondent

JUDGMENT

He appeals agai against both his conviction and his sentence.

The prosecution case rested entirely on the evidence of one Chandar Bali, a taxi driver. According to it the appellant had hired his taxi from the market at 2.15 a.m. and asked him to drive to Derrick Street. There he had slapped him and taken from him a sum of about $4.00; that was all the money Chandar Bali had on his person.

The appellant denied being in Chandar Bali's taxi that night and the whole issue, therefore, was one of identification.

In my view, the learned Magistrate approached the issue carefully and correctly. He directed himself in the following terms:

"Thus, at this stage, I remind myself as to the care which the Court must exercise in convicting a person on the uncorroborated evidence of identification of on alleged thief at night, especially when such identification takes place one week later."

He then went on to assess the evidence:

"If I accept the 1 P.W.’s evidence as to the events that night, which I have no hesitation in so doing, then I equally have no hesitation in finding that the circumstances of identification were conclusive to a positive identification. This is not a case where a witness merely had a glimpse of an alleged wrongdoer, but one where the witness had a discussion, prior to taking his passenger on a journey, and discussion during the said journey in which the route was altered and was face to face with the passenger during the robbery. In addition the Accused is a powerful man of distinctive appearance.

Finally, there being no evidence of any ill-feeling between the Accused and 1 P.W., there is in my view no reason to conclude that he was other than absolutely satisfied that the Accused is the person who robbed him, when he subsequently identified him out of a group of 4 or 5 Fijians a week later."

I cannot see anything in his approach to the issue of identification which will justify interfering with his finding. The appeal against conviction is dismissed.

As for the sentence, the Courts have consistently, and quite correctly, taken a serious view of assaults and robbery on taxi drivers who perform an important service to the community and the very nature of whose work exposes them to the risk of being victims of such offences.

The appeal against sentence is also dismissed.

G. Mishra
JUDGE

Suva,
30th June, 1977