Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback High Court of Fiji

Ram v The State [1991] FJHC 4; Haa0100.90s (11 January 1991)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI
At Suva
Appellate Jurisdiction

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100 OF 1990

Between:

ANANT RAM
s/o Chet Ram
Appellant

v.

THE STATE
Respondent

Appellant in Person
Mr. S. Hettige for the Respondent

JUDGMENT

The appellant pleaded guilty to an offence of Act with Intent to Cause Grievous Harm and was sentenced to 18 months imprisonment on the 24th of September, 1990.

He now appeals against the sentence on the ground that it is harsh and excessive and urges numerous personal matters in mitigation that were not placed before the learned trial magistrate.

The facts outlined by the police prosecutor and admitted by the appellant are fairly short and bears repeating. They were:

"On the 27.3.90 at 8.30 p.m. the accused was swearing at his wife. The complainant who is the brother of wife of accused came and told accused not to swear. Accused challenged the complainant. Both went out to the park where accused had a paper cutter and cut complainant on the chest."

The medical report which was tendered in the lower court disclosed multiple lacerated wounds numbering 6 of varying lengths and depths to the complainant's chest and thigh. Fortunately however none were of a life-threatening nature nor were any major organs or blood vessels adversely affected.

In mitigation the appellant is recorded as having said: "I have a lot of family problems. Ask for leniency".

At the hearing of the appeal the appellant who is 30 years of age reiterated that he was having family problems at the time and although he is not a first offender this is undoubtedly his first experience of prison life. He professes to have learnt a salutary lesson from the 3 1/2 months he has already spent in prison and he pleads for mercy.

Whilst the attack on a person with a sharp instrument is always viewed with seriousness, the particular circumstances of this case are not completely devoid of "provocation" nor does it appear as if the learned trial magistrate had directed his mind to the appellant's guilty plea.

In all the circumstances this court is able to show the appellant some leniency by ordering his release from prison on a sentence of 12 months imprisonment suspended for 2 years with effect from the date hereof.

The appellant is warned that if he commits an imprisonable offence within the next 2 years then he will be required to serve this sentence of 12 months imprisonment along with any other sentence that may be imposed on him for his re-offending.

(D.V. Fatiaki)
JUDGE

At Suva,
11th January, 1991.

HAA100.90S