IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI
AT SUVA
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. HAC 29 of 2022

STATE

vs

1.	Savenaca Raiyala
2.	Tikiko Delai Iranatora

Counsels:     Ms. Naidu N	  -	for Prosecution
	         Ms. Kean T	 -	for Accused Persons

Date of Sentence Hearing:	15 March 2022
Date of Sentence: 		23 March 2022

------------------------------------------------------
SENTENCE

1.	Savenaca RaiyaLa and Tikiko Delai Iranatora you were jointly charged on following information with one count of Aggravated Burglary.

COUNT 1

Statement of Offence
AGGRAVATED BURGLARY: Contrary to Section 313(1) (a) of the Crimes Act 2009.

Particulars of Offence
Savenaca Raiyala and Tikiko Delai Iranatora on the 13th day of January, 2022 at Wainadoi, in the Central Division, in the company of each other entered into shed no,.10 of RAM SAMI POULTRY FARM as a trespasser with intent to commit theft.

2.	Both of you pleaded guilty on your own free will to the above mentioned count represented by Legal Aid. You understood the consequences of the guilty plea for the offence you have committed. This Court was satisfied that the guilty pleas are informed and unequivocal and entered freely and voluntarily by both of you.

3.	You agreed to the following summary of facts, when they were read to you in court on 15/03/2022. This Court was convinced that the agreed summary of facts satisfy all the elements for the offence you are charged with. You were found guilty on the count, as charged.

4.	The summary of facts are, as follows:
•	The first accused Savenaca Raiyala, 22 years old unemployed from Wainadoi, Navua, hereinafter referred to as “A1”. A1 has been charged for one count of Aggravated Burglary contrary to Section 313 (1) (a) of the Crimes Act 2009.

•	The 2nd accuse is Tikiko Delai Iranatora, 20 years old farmer from Wainadoi, Navua, hereianafter referred to as “A2”. A2 has been charged for one count of Aggravated Burglary contrary to Section 313 (1) (a) of the Crimes Act 2009.

•	The complainant is Isireli Madigi, 26 years old Security Officer of Wainadoii, Navua, hereinafter referred to as PW1. Prosecution Witness 2 is Sainivalati Saro, 26 years old Security officer of Wainadoi, Navua.

•	PW1 and PW2 are employed at Lei Security Company and were contracted by Ram Sami Company based at Wainadoi. They both commence their job at 5pm daily and finish by 7pm the next morning.  Their normal routine is to look after the 13 poultry sheds at Ram Sami farm.

•	On 13th January 2022, between 11pm to 12am PW1 was doing his 2nd round routine check around the Ram Sami poultry farm sheds.  He first checked shed no. 10 at about 10 pm, whereby all the lights at the worksite were switched off as it was the normal procedure.

•	PW1 went on the 2nd round check at shed no.10, whereby he noticed a pair of flip flops, a green lighter and a t-shirt navy blue in colour were lying outside next to the shed.  He suspected that someone was inside shed 10 and alerted PW2.  

•	Upon entering the shed, PW1 and PW2 found A1 and A2 inside the shed.   Both accused persons were arrested and Wainadoi Police post was notified of the incident.  A report was lodged, whereby both accused were re-arrested by Police and escorted to Navua Police Station.  Both accused persons were interviewed under caution, whereby they made admissions of the commission of this offence together.

5.	In comprehending the gravity of the offence you have committed, I am mindful that the maximum punishment for the offence of Aggravated Burglary under Section 313 (1) (a) of the Crimes Act of 2009 is an imprisonment term of 17 years.

6.	The accepted tariff for count 1 depends on the nature and circumstances under which Aggravated Burglary was committed, and the consequences entailing the commission of the offence to the victims and public at large.

7.	This Court also recognizes that to address the rapid increase of Burglaries and Robberies in our community, any punishment imposed by Court for these offences should have a reprehensible deterrent effect that could also send a profoundly strong signal to discourage potential wrong doers.

8.	In imposing the appropriate punishment for your admitted guilt, this Court intends to follow the tariff regime pronounces for Aggravated Burglary in the case of State v Seninawanawa [2015] FJHC548 925 June 2018), where Midigan J states:

“The accepted tariff for aggravated burglary is a sentence of between 18 months and three years, with three years being the standard sentence for burglary of domestic premises.”

9.	This tariff has been followed in several decided cases, i.e.,  State v. Tavualevu [2013] FJHC 246; HAC 43.2013 (16 May 2013); State v.Drose [2017] FJHC 205; HAC 325.2015 (28 February 2017); State v. Rasegadi & Another [2018] FJHC 364; HAC 101.2018 (7 May 2018) and State v. Mudu [2020] FJHC 609; HAC 116.2020 (30 JULY 2020).

10.	In this matter, you have entered the Ram Sami Poultry Farm Sheds during the late night on 13/01/2022 with the intention to steal eggs from that premises. Further, you had pre-planned this offence, where you have entered the premises when the security guards guarding the property were not around. 

11.	In assessing the objective seriousness of offending of the two of you in this matter, I considered the maximum sentence prescribed for the offence, the degree of culpability, the manner in which you committed the offence and the harm caused to the complainant organisation, which is in the nature of potential economic loss. I gave due cognizance to the sentencing guidelines stipulated in Section 4 of the Sentencing and Penalties Act 2009. This is a Burglary that happened in a farm shed that is operated for business purposes. I am very mindful that offences of this nature disturbs the development of trade activities in our community, which brings revenue to our economy. In this regard, the Courts have a duty to discourage and deter this kind of anti-social behavior that makes conducting trade in our society unprofitable, discouraging potential entrepreneurs in venturing into trade activities. Having considered all these factors, I would pick a starting point of 24 months imprisonment against each of you.

12.	In this matter, no considerable aggravating factors have been mentioned by the prosecution, except the fact that you attempted to encroach and steal from another party’s private property.    
 
13.	In mitigation, the defense counsel has informed Court that you both are of young age and that you are first offenders and that you have maintained good characters before the involvement in this offence. Further, your counsel has informed the court that you have entered an early guilty plea and that you regret your action on the day in question. You have also been supportive to the police during investigations after your arrest. By pleading guilty to the charge you have saved courts time and resources at a very early stage of the court proceedings. Further, in consideration of the age of the 2 of you, your rehabilitation potential is very high. Therefore, I intend to consider your rehabilitation potential and this should be balanced with deterrence and community protection.  

14.	For all these grounds in mitigation, you should receive a considerable discount in the sentence. In this regard, I give you a reduction of one third in your sentence. 

15.	The prosecution brings to the attention of this Court that you have been in custody since your arrest on 14/01/2022 till now, that is 2 months and 10 days. This period should be deducted from your sentence separately.

16.	Savenaca RaiyaLa and Tikiko Delai Iranatora RIA, I sentence you to 21 months and 20 days imprisonment. Further, in considering the potential you have for rehabilitation, with the authority given to this Court by Section 26 of the Sentencing and Penalties Act of 2009, your sentence is partially suspended, where you shall serve 03 months and 20 days of your sentence forthwith, and the remaining period of 10 months is suspended for three (03) years. 

17.	If you commit any crime punishable by imprisonment during the above operational period of three (3) years and found guilty by the Court, you are liable to be charged and prosecuted for an offence according to Section 28 of the Sentencing and Penalties Act of 2009.

18.	You have thirty (30) days to appeal to the Fiji Court of Appeal. 

……….…………………………………
Hon. Justice Dr. Thushara Kumarage

At Suva
23 March 2022

cc:	Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions
	Office of the Legal Aid Commission