Pius v Kasta [2010] PGDC 70; DC3095 (5 June 2010)

DC3095

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

[IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF JUSTICE
SITTING IN ITS CRIMINAL (GRADE FIVE) JURISDICTION]
GFCr 23Of 2018

BETWEEN

JAMES PIUS
Informant

AND

FELIX KASTA
Defendant

BUKA: B. Tasikul, PM
2010: JUNE 5^TH

CRIMINAL: Stealing of a police official Firearm the property of the State. Plead Guilty. First time offender-

CASES CITED:

REFRENCES:
s.372 (1) Criminal Code Act

COUNSEL:
Name of Lawyer, for the Informant: SeniorConstable Cecilia
Name of Lawyer, for the Defendant: In person

DECISION ON SENTENCE

1. B.TASIKUL, The defendant Felix Kasta pleaded guilty to the charge of Stealing a high powered firearm a KIA -001120 Korean Made semi-automatic rifle value at K70,000.00 the property of Bougainville Police Service.
   
2. It is alleged that on the 07^th February, 2017 the defendant was at the Police Transport Office when the weapon went missing.
   
3. When he left the office without consulting the officer in charge took the weapon with him. The officer in charge upon returning to the office found that the weapon was missing. An investigation was conducted and the defendant was identified as the prime suspect. He denied stealing and for the next 10 months they could not locate the weapon until an informant told the police that he bought the weapon from the defendant for K15,000.00 He was again questioned and he admitted stealing and selling the weapon. He was charge for stealing under section .372 (6) (a) of Criminal Code
   
4. The issue before this court is what would be the appropriate sentence to impose on the prisoner.
   
5. Section 372 (1) (6) (a) states that: Any person who steals anything capable of being stolen is guilty of a crime. (6) If the offender is a person employed in the Public Service, and the thing stolen- (a) is the property of the State; he is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding seven (7) years imprisonment.
   
6. The prisoner is liable to be imprisonment for a term not exceeding seven years. However, under s. 19 of the Criminal Code Act the court has discretion to impose alternative sentence.
   
7. In considering the appropriate sentence for the prisoner I took into consideration the following factors. His personal particulars, mitigating factor, aggravating factors, and pre-sentence report.
   
8. The prisoner in his allocutus has asked the court for a Probation sentence. The prisoner is currently a serving police officer who has served the Police Department for twenty –one (21) years. His is 44 years old, married with five children.
   
9. The mitigating factors for the prisoner is that he pleaded guilty at the earlier stage which saves time, he express remorse and apologized to the court, he is a first time offender.
   
10. The aggravating factors against the prisoner are that, the offence committed is a very serious offence, he is a police officer and knows the law, he never cooperated well with the police during the investigation, and theproperty belongs to the State which cost a lot of money.
    
11. A pre-sentence report was submitted by the Probation Service which includes information from Police Station Commander and North Regional Commander respectively. They both recommended for a non-custodial sentence as the prisoner is a hard working officer and he is needed during the coming referendum to assist and boast police manpower.
    
12. I also noted that the weapon has not been recovered and the prisoner is willing to pay back the K15.000.00 from the person who bought the weapon.
    
13. In taking into consideration all of the above factors I ask myself then what would be the appropriate sentence this court should impose?
    
14. In the case of State V Wellington Belawa the Supreme Court held that when considering a sentence on people in position of trust must be severe and public interest must be paramount. In your case the defendant is a serving police officer. He knows that stealing is a very serious offence, especially a high powered weapon.
    
15. Police officers must lead by example and for you to commit such offence is no excuse. You have shown no remorse. Yes your two senior officers through the pre-sentence report recommended for a non-custodial sentence. You have indicated that you are willing to repay back the money.
    
16. Having considered all of the above factors I hereby sentence you to three years imprisonment. However, this sentence is deferred until January the 31^st January 2020 on the condition that the weapon is return or alternatively you pay K15, 000.00 for the return of the weapon. During this period from now till January 2020 a probation report will be submitted upon complied with this condition.