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

Tuta v The State [2002] FJHC 82; HAA0005j.2002b (20 May 2002)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI
AT LABASA
APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 5 OF 2002
(Taveuni Mag. Ct. Crim. Case No. 329/01)

Between:

SETEO TUTA
Appellant

and

STATE
Respondent

Appellant in person
Mr. J. Rabuku for the State

JUDGMENT

This is an appeal against sentence and is lodged on the grounds, inter alia, that it is “harsh and excessive taking into account the true nature of what really happened in this case”.

The appellant was sentenced by the Resident Magistrate, Labasa to two years’ imprisonment for the offence of larceny of cattle contrary to section 275 of the Penal Code Cap.17 in that he with another “on the 25^th day of October, 2001 at Vatuawiri Estate, Taveuni in the Northern Division, stole a cow valued at $300.00 the property of Vatuwiri Estate”.

It is the appellant’s submission that the co-accused who had a number of previous convictions received a sentence of two years six months’ imprisonment whereas he with no conviction received a sentence of two years’ imprisonment as well. The sentence therefore he says is harsh and excessive. He says that he is single and is a 22 year old farmer.

The learned State Counsel concedes that taking into account the facts surrounding the case and the accused’s plea of guilty and no previous convictions the sentence is excessive. He said that a group of people were involved including the co-accused who has a bad record of previous convictions and who is the ‘ring leader’.

There is no doubt that the appellant a young man of 22 years has committed a serious offence after falling into bad company. He along with other young boys was lured into committing this offence. From what has been revealed in other appeals today before me on cattle stealing there was a modus operandi where the second accused would lure young villagers on different dates to go in the complainant’s farm and kill cattle and depart from there with the carcass from the slaughtered animal and consumed in their village.

In all the circumstances of this case, bearing in mind the appellant’s plea of guilty with a clear record and the State conceding the appeal, I find that the sentence on this appellant is on the high side particularly also because there is a great disparity between his sentence and that of his co-accused who has a number of previous convictions.

The views that I have expressed should not be regarded as being lenient, far from it, for cattle stealing is regarded as a very serious offence and offenders are to be dealt with severely in such cases depending on the prevalence of the offence. However, each case has to be dealt with on its own facts.

For these reasons I set aside the sentence of two years’ imprisonment and substitute it with one of one year.

The appeal is therefore allowed to this extent.

D. Pathik
Judge

At Labasa
20 May 2002