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

Narayan v The State [2002] FJHC 153; HAA0014j.2002B (26 August 2002)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI
AT LABASA
APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. HAA0014 and 15 OF 2002
(Labasa Mag. Ct. Crim. Case Nos. 882 and 881 of 2001)

Between:

UDIT NARAYAN
s/o Ram Dass
Appellant

and

STATE
Respondent

Appellant in Person
Mr. J. Rabuku for the State

JUDGMENT

The appeals are against sentence on the ground that they are harsh and excessive.

In Criminal Case No. 881 of 2001 on 17 December 2001 on his own plea the accused was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment as follows.

1^st Count - 9 months imprisonment for larceny

2^nd Count - 6 months concurrent to Count 1 for

escaping from lawful custody

3^rd Count - 6 months concurrent to Count 2 for resisting arrest.

These sentences (totalling 9 months concurrent) were made consecutive to sentence in Criminal Case No. 882/01.

In Criminal Case 882/01 on the same day (17.12.01) the appellant was on his own plea sentenced to imprisonment for 9 months.

The total sentence to be served is 18 months.

On appeal the appellant submitted to Court that he wants a reduction in his sentence as it is high; he has wife, mother and three children to look after. He said that he is 37 years old, has very little education and comes from the rural area of Dreketi.

The learned counsel for the State opposed the appeal stating that the appellant stole valuable and expensive items. In Criminal Case No. 882/01 he stole an outboard engine valued at $2000. He gave it to his cousin to keep. Although the item was finally recovered the offence is serious. He said that the sentence of 9 months was lenient.

In the other case, he said that although the value of goats stolen was $285.00, this offence was committed in an agricultural area. The keeping of goats is a source of livelihood for the complainants.

Furthermore, looking at his previous convictions he does not appear to have learned his lesson although he managed to keep out of prison.

Having heard both the appellant and Mr. Rabuku I find that there is no merit whatsoever in the appeals. If anything, the total sentence is on the low side. Looking at his previous convictions and the sentences passed on him, he managed to evade the taste of prison life. He has been properly sentenced to the said term of imprisonment. The farming community has to be protected from such offenders.

The sentences are neither harsh nor excessive or wrong in principle. The appeals are therefore dismissed.

D. Pathik
Judge

At Labasa
26 August 2002