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

State v Naisua [2007] FJMC 21; Criminal Case No 630 of 2006 (29 June 2007)

IN THE RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT
AT SUVA

Criminal Case No. 630 of 2006

STATE

V

ROPATE NAISUA

Before Ajmal Gulab Khan Esq

Date of Hearing: 21/06/07
Date of Judgment: 29/06/07

Prosecution: Sgt. Harish
Accused: In Person

JUDGMENT

The accused has been charged for Burglary under S295 (a) of the Penal Code.

Particulars are Ropate Naisua on 14th March 2006 at Lami by night broke and entered dwelling of Deborah Jamieson and stole a lap top computer $2800, MP3 player $500, assorted liquor $180 and cigarette total value of $3634.50.

The Prosecution called the complainant and her caretaker who gave evidence.

The complainant found her house was entered forcefully and ranch doors open. Also found items in the charge missing. Her caretaker saw two boys in the compound with a carry bag. He identified and recognized the accused but didn’t know his accomplice. While he asked questions they ran from him. He gave a chase. Accused threw the bag and escaped. A flip flop was also left by them whilst running.

The bag contained the lap top computer which was exposed to the sea water and was not usable. The complainant identified it as hers.

The accused gave un-sworn statement. He denied the burglary. He also questioned the caution interview which was an admission.

I found the interview to be voluntarily given and admitted it in evidence.

The second prosecution witness identified the accused as the person who ran and threw the bag with complainant’s lap top. The caution interview also describes and reconstructed the scene as it happened at the night of burglary.

Except for the lap top no other items were recovered. The lap top was in possession of the accused in the bag which was thrown away during the chase.

The accused has given full explanation as to how the lap top was with him in caution interview but not in court. He was known to PW2 and identified by him to be the person in possession of the stolen item. I accept the evidence of PW 2 in its entirety.

I find the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.

The accused is found guilty as charged.

Dated this the 29th day of June 2007.

Ajmal Gulab Khan
RESIDENT MAGISTRATE