Republic v Teraaka [2019] KIHC 125; Criminal Case 28 of 2019 (3 December 2019)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KIRIBATI 2019

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 28 OF 2019

[THE REPUBLIC PROSECUTOR
[
BETWEEN [AND
[
[TEWEBWE TERAAKA ACCUSED

Before: The Hon Chief Justice Sir John Muria

20 November 2019

Ms Eveata Maata for the Prosecutor
Ms Taoing Taoaba for the Accused

SENTENCE

Muria, CJ: The accused had been charged with the offence of False Pretence. She pleaded guilty.

Agreed Facts

2. On or about 22 September 2016, Tebwebwe Teraaka went to Bauntiti and his wife to ask for an empty cheque to use for some teaching purposes. She told them that the cheque would not be used and that they had nothing to worry about. Later on the complainant were surprised when they were informed by the Bank that their account had been penalized for overdraft. After enquiries they found that the cheque that Tebwebwe took from them had been deposited with the bank. As a result of the overdraft the complainants were penalized in the sum of $600. The complainant approached Tebwebwe who apologized and explained to them of what happened. She then offered them her deep freezer to cover the penalty. The deep freezer was valued at $2,800.

3. Ms Maata submitted that the accused was earlier in the year convicted for similar offence and sentenced to 2 years 8 months. The accused is presently serving sentence for that offence. The present offence shows a repetition by the accused in engaging in fraudulent activities. Counsel submitted the sentence should be one of custodial sentence.

4. Ms Taoaba, in mitigation, submitted that the accused pleaded guilty and remorseful for her action. Counsel submitted that the nature of the accused’s action was not serious. Counsel asked the Court to take into account her personal circumstances, including the fact that she has three young children. She is 28 years old.

5. I have considered the submissions by Counsel. What is clear is that the accused deliberately made a calculated act to defraud the victims Bauniti and his wife. She asked the victims for a blank cheque pretending that she needed the blank cheque for teaching purposes which was not true. Instead she used the cheque to obtain money from the victim’s Bank Account.

6. I take into account all that was said on her behalf. I cannot overlook the fact that the accused had been sentenced to 2 years 8 months in September this year for similar offence. I agree with Ms Maata that the proper sentence is custodial.

7. I bear in mind that her present 2 years 8 months sentence was for two counts of false pretences and one count of fraudulent falsification of accounts and that she was sentenced after a trial. In this case she pleaded guilty and as such she is entitled to 30% reduction in her sentence: Republic –v- Arawaia [2013] KICA 11.

8. I take into account also the fact that the offence was committed in September 2016. For the delay in having the matter hanging over her head for three years, the accused is entitled to a modest reduction as shown in
Attorney-General –v- Li Jian Pei [2015] KICA 5. A reduction of 2½ months would be appropriate.

9. Taking all these factors and the submissions on her behalf I feel a custodial sentence is appropriate. The length of that sentence is 18 months taking into account her guilty plea.

10. SENTENCE: 1 year 6 months’ imprisonment with effect from today. This is on top of her present sentence which she is currently serving.
    

Dated the 3^rd day of December 2019

SIR JOHN MURIA
Chief Justice