Pige v Teparo [2022] PGDC 57; DC8060 (19 April 2022)

DC8060

Papua New Guinea

[In the Criminal Jurisdictions of the District Court Held at Waigani]
SITTING IN ITS COMMITTAL JURISDICTION

COM NO 11 OF 2021
CB NO 4430 OF 2021

BETWEEN:

NIE PIGE
[Informant]

AND:

KONSY TEPARO
[Defendants]

Waigani: Paul Puri Nii

14th April 2022

COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS: Charge-Murder-Section 300(1)–Criminal Code Act. Witness statements- State evidence- suitable formation of prima facie evidence - elements of the charge persistent –Evidence is equal- Defendant committed to stand trial.

PRACTISE AND PROCEDURE: Calculation of evidence under Section 95 of the District Court Act. Defendant landed an iron rod on the victim’s head and -elements and evidence of murder. Evidence of murder sustained.

PNG Cases cited:

NIL

Overseas cases cited:

NIL

REFERENCE

Legislation
Criminal Code Act 1974, [Chapter 262]
District Court Act 1963, Chapter 40

Counsel
Police Prosecutor: Joseph Sangam For the Informant
Public Solicitor: David Kaiok For the Defendant

COMMITTAL RULING

19^th April 2022

INTRODUCTION

NII, P. Paul Magistrate. Conclusion on committal under Section 95 of the District Court Act. On 22^st February 2022, accused asked the court to go through his submission filed on 21^st December 2021 and the Police file and make a ruling. The similar attitude was undertaken by police and thus is my decision on police evidence.

CHARGE

1. Defendant is charged under Section 300 (1) of the Criminal Code Act. The essentials of the charge is shown below:
   

“300. MURDER.

(1)^{[1] [2]}Subject to the succeeding provisions of this Code, a person who kills another person under any of the following circumstances is guilty of murder:–

(a) if the offender intended to do grievous bodily harm to the person killed or to some other person;

(b) if death was caused by means of an act–

(i) done in the prosecution of an unlawful purpose; and

(ii) of such a nature as to be likely to endanger human life;

(c) if the offender intended to do grievous bodily harm to some person for the purpose of facilitating–

(i) the commission of a crime other than a crime specified by a law (including this Code) to be a crime for which a person may only be arrested by virtue of a warrant; or

(ii) the flight of an offender who has committed or attempted to commit an offence referred to in Subparagraph (i);

(d) if death was caused by administering any stupefying or overpowering thing for a purpose specified in Paragraph (c);

(e) if death was caused by wilfully stopping the breath of a person for a purpose specified in Paragraph (c).

Penalty: Subject to Section 19, imprisonment for life.”

BRIEF PARTICULARS

2. Defendant is described by police as aged 27 years old and is from Lufa area of the Eastern Highlands Province whom police allege that on 6^th December 2020 at Gorobe market at Badili allegedly murdered another person namely Fongu Luama a national.
   
3. Police allege that on the above date the accused and the deceased were happing an argument concerning something. Subsequently, Defendant punched the deceased victim on his head and he fell on the ground and could not stand up. The deceased was later taken to Port Moresby general but was pounced death upon arrival. The accused was subsequently arrested on 9^th December 2020 and charged pursuant to Section 300(1) of the Criminal Code Act.
   

ISSUE

4. Whether or not there is allowable evidence to commit the Defendant for the allegation.
   

THE LAW

5. The court’s power to rule on police evidence is under Section 95 of the District Court Act, which is in the following manner:
   

“95 Court to consider whether prima facie case.

(1) Where all the evidence offered on the part of the prosecution has been heard or received, the Court shall consider whether it is sufficient to put the defendant on trial.

(2) If the Court is of opinion that the evidence is not sufficient to put the defendant on trial for an indictable offence it shall immediately order the defendant, if in custody, to be discharged as to the information then under inquiry.

(3) If the Court is of opinion that the evidence is sufficient to put the defendant on trial for an indictable offence, it shall proceed with the examination in accordance with this Division.”

ELEMENTS OF THE OFFENCE

1. Accused;
2. Had an intention to cause harm to the deceased;

100. Inflicted grievous bodily harm on the deceased;

4. Which lead to his eventual death
   

EVIDENCE

Police case

6. Police evidence is in the police file tendered to the court on 13^th April 2021. The file contains witness statements and other evidence including photo exhibits and the Defendant’s ROI.
   
7. List of police evidence:
   

No	Name	Particulars	statements
1	Luamo Francis	Gorobe street-Badili	This witness says on 6th December 2020, he was at Gorobe market getting ready for morning work termed “work of life” when Defendant came and punched him. Witness says he did not retaliate because out of respect that he is older than him. Witness says Defendant later went and punched the deceased on his face without any reason and he fell to the ground who was later admitted to Pom general for head injuries but died later.
2	Dr Sylvester Ratawa Kotapu	Medical Doctor	He is a medical doctor and he says he conducted the post mortem into the deceased body under a coroner court’s order.
3	Samson Pantan	Crime Scene officer-Policeman	This witness says he is a policemen who took photos of the crime scene regarding the alleged murder of the deceased.
4	Yaku Gwampom	Police Corroborator	Police witness who corroborated the ROI.
5	Nei Pige	Arresting officer-	Police arresting officer who did the initial investigation including the ROI .

Defense case

8. Defendant through the submission filed on 20^th December 2021 argues that evidence is insufficient to commit the Defendant since Defendant was over drunk and fell on the concrete and broke his own head after being punched by the Defendant. Moreover Defendant says medical report is defective as it does not conform to the requirements under the evidence Act.
   

DELIBERATION OF EVIDENCE

9. Evidence shows there was an allegation of murder by the defendant on 6^th December 2020 at Gorobe in Badili, NCD. Evidence shows on 28^th December 2020, when the Defendant was taken in for interrogation by the case informant, he told the case informed that he punched the victim. Defendant also stated at question 20 of is ROI that he punched the victim and later he fell to the ground after the victim labeled him as a woman. Defendant however said he had not intention to kill the victim.
   

RULING

10. I have measured the evidence and noted that on the morning of 6^th December 2020, between 5am and 6amam, the accused and Defendant had an argument and they fought and during the fight Defendant punched the victim who later fell on the concrete on brook his skull.
    
11. Defendant admitted on his ROI he admitted having punched the victim because he says he was labelled by the victim as a woman. However, Defendant argued that he had not intention to kill him.
    
12. In my calculation of evidence I am gratified that Defendant had a fight with the deceased after he was called a women. Evidence shows that after when the victim called him a woman he got infuriated and he planned to punch him. Once a plan is put into execution, the result is achieved. Without proper planning there would not be any anticipated result.
    
13. Evidence shows in the process of planning to punch the victim after he was called a woman, defendant knew how the accused would be attacked and thus he was punched on the face. I have also assessed the Defense submission, however, I am satisfied with police evidence that on 6^th December 2020 between 5am -6am in the morning, the accused had an intention to cause harm to the deceased; when planned to punch the victim after when the Defendant was called a woman and when the Defendant punched the victim on the face, the Defendant Inflicted grievous bodily harm on the deceased which lead to his eventual death.
    

CONCLUSSION

14. Therefore, it is my ruling under Section 95(1) of the District Court Act that police evidence is acceptable to make a prima facie case against the Defendant for the charge of Murder under Section 300(1).
    

ORDERS

15. My Orders:
    
    1. Evidence is sufficient to commit Defendant Ikwaro Maona for the charge of Murder under Section 300(1) of the Criminal Code Act.
       
    2. Defendant is committed to stand trial.
       
    100. Warrant issued for the Defendant to be remanded.
         

Public Solicitor For the defendant
Police Prosecutor For the State

---

1. ^[1]Section 300(1) amended by Act No. 13 of 1977, s22; amended by Act No. 12 of 1982, s3.
2. ^[2]Section 300(1) amended by Act No. 13 of 1977, s22; amended by Act No. 12 of 1982, s3.