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

State v Aziz [2011] FJHC 637; HAC189.2011 (6 October 2011)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI
AT SUVA
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

HIGH COURT CRIMINAL CASE NO: HAC 189 OF 2010

BETWEEN:

STATE
PROSECUTION

AND:

ABDUL AZIZ
ACCUSED PERSON

Counsel: State - Ms. T. Leweni
For Accused Person - In Person

Dates of Hearing: 26th, 27th, 28th September and 3rd October 2011
Date of Summing Up: 5th October 2011
Date of Judgment: 6th October 2011

JUDGMENT

[1] After deliberating for 30 minutes the assessors returned their unanimous opinion that the accused is guilty of the following offences.

FIRST COUNT

Statement of Offence

MURDER: Contrary to section 237 of the Crimes Decree No. 44 of 2009.

Particulars of Offence

Abdul Aziz f/n Abdul Waheb, on the 10th day of September, 2010 at Togoru, Navua in the Central Division, murdered Abdul Rauf f/n Abdul Rahim.

SECOND COUNT

Statement of Offence

CRIMINAL INTIMIDATION: Contrary to section 375 (1)(a) of the Crime Decree No. 44 of 2009.

Particulars of Offence

Abdul Aziz f/n Abdul Waheb, on the 10th day of September, 2010 at Togoru, Navua in the Central Division, without lawful excuse threatened SAMINA BIBI f/n MOHAMMED TAHIR to chop her with a cane knife with intent to cause alarm to the said SAMINA BIBI F/N MOHAMMED TAHIR.

[2] I adjourned to consider my judgment. I direct myself with the law contained in my summing up to the assessors.

[3] The prosecution called 14 witnesses and the accused gave sworn evidence.

[4] Samina Bibi giving evidence said that the accused came to them carrying a cane knife and asked the deceased Abdul Rauf "why did you come to my land?" and struck Abdul Rauf with the cane knife. Daughter of the accused Gulnaz Bibi giving evidence corroborated the version of the witness Samina, on the accused striking the deceased with the cane knife.

[5] Samina Bibi also testified as to how the accused chased her to chop her with the knife and that she escaped by getting into the house of Amina.

[6] Amina also giving evidence corroborated the evidence of Samina.

[7] Accused giving evidence said that the deceased threw a stone at him and his head was injured. The version of the eye witnesses for the prosecution was that, when Adam Dean threw a piece of wood on the accused, it hit the knife which was carried by the accused and the knife hit accused's head.

[8] Dr Navakamocea giving his opinion on the injury on accused head said, that it was consistent with a sharp object but not a heavy rock. Also accused had given a different version to Dr Navakamocea when he was seen by the doctor. On 10th September 2010 when Dr Navakamocea saw the accused, he had said that he was hit with a stick by someone other than the deceased.

[9] Therefore, the accused version that the deceased hit him with a stone cannot be accepted.

[10] Forensic Pathologist Dr Goundar confirmed that the cause of death of the deceased was, deep cut injury to the head.

[11] Therefore prosecution has proved all elements of the offence of murder in Count No. 1 beyond reasonable doubt.

[12] Accused admitted that he chased after Samina. However he said that he went to Amina's house to tell Samina not to bring any notice or any person home, which cannot be accepted on the evidence placed before Court.

[13] Eye witnesses testified that accused chased Samina with the knife.

[14] Therefore I find that the prosecution has proved all element of the offence of Criminal intimidation in Count No. 2.

[15] In the above circumstances I agree with the unanimous opinion of the assessors that the accused is guilty of the offences in Count No. 1 and 2.

[16] Hence I find the accused guilty of Count No. 1 and 2 of the information and convict the accused on Count No. 1 and 2.

Priyantha Fernando
Judge

At Suva
06 October 2011