Regina v Narayan [1979] FJSC 25; Criminal Appeal No. 24 of 1979 (8 June 1979)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FIJI
(WESTERN DIVISION)
AT LAUTOKA

Appellate Jurisdiction
Criminal Appeal No. 24 of 1979

BETWEEN

REGINA
(Appellant)

AND

NARAYAN
s/o Yankanna
(Respondent)

Mr. D. Williams, Counsel for the Appellant
Mr. S. R Shankar, Counsel for the Respondent

JUDGMENT

The accused was convicted on his own plea of an illegal sale of liquor contrary to section (76(1) (a) and (2) of Cap.167.

A Fijian went to his house and purchased a bottle of beer for 70c. A police officer noticed the purchaser leaving the house.

In mitigation the accused said he had never done this before and the sale was made because the man had pestered him to sell it. The magistrate accepted that statement and discharged the accused under S.38 P.C.

The Director of Public Prosecutions has appealed against the magistrate’s order on the ground that it is excessively lenient.

Recently there has been a public outcry against drunkenness and the fact that beer can be purchased in out of the way places and/or times when it would not otherwise be available.

It is not the easiest of offence to detect and it is always open to the accused to plead that he had never sold beer before and that this was an isolated case.

One cannot assume that it was not an isolated case.

On the other hand when it is revealed that a certain kind of offence has become a matter of public concern it is for the police to be vigilant in catching the offenders and for the Courts to endeavour to deter would be offenders.

It would be surprising if the accused as a member of the public was not aware of the public’s concern.

The issue of liquor licences is specially governed by statute and controlled by licensing authorities for reasons which are obvious.

The behaviour of persons such as the accused cannot be other than a deliberate contravention of the law.

I would say with respect that at the present time magistrate should view such offences more seriously. In fact I have noted a tendency among them to impose very much heavier penalties on offenders.

The Order of the learned magistrate is set aside and in its place I impose a fine of $50.00.

Sgd. (J.T. WILLIAMS)

JUDGE

LAUTOKA,
8th June, 1979.