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

State v Gade [2010] FJMC 72; Criminal Case 403 of 2010 (21 July 2010)

IN THE MAGISTRATE'S COURT AT LAUTOKA

Criminal Case No 403/10

BETWEEN

THE STATE

AND

SITERI GADE

SENTENCE

1. You Siteri Gade are to be sentenced upon pleading guilty to six counts of theft contrary to Section 291(1) of the Crimes Decree No 44 of 2009.
   
2. The maximum sentence for this offence is imprisonment for 10 years.
   
3. In this case I pick my starting point for each count as 18 months.
   
4. It was revealed that on the 03rd July 2010 you have bumped on to the complainant from the back when the complainant and her mother were buying vegetables at the market and have picked the Complainant's purse from her bag. You have withdrawn $ 850 dollars from the complainant's account by using the ATM card and the pin number which was in the purse you stole. You withdrew this money in five different occasions within the same day.
   
5. The money you stole is not recovered. Although no charge is brought against you, the licence card, FNPF card, birth certificate and other items which were in the purse were also not found.
   
6. You have 8 previous convictions. Out of those eight offences 7 are for larceny and in 6 instances you have been bound over and released by the courts. Even in the other two instances a suspended sentence and a fine is imposed. Further it appears that you committed this offence within the period you were bound over in case no 739/09 of Suva Court.
   
7. It appears that you have not learnt a lesson from your previous sentences. You were doing the same mistakes again and again. When the courts repeatedly show leniency towards offenders it could invariably loose the confidence of the public in the justice system.
   
8. It does not appear that you have a genuine intention to correct yourself. Imposing lenient sentences on you has only resulted in more offences being committed by you.
   
9. Thus for the aggravating factors I enhance the sentence by six months for each count.
   
10. In mitigation you said that you ask for forgiveness and that you will not do that mistake again. You asked for time to pay a fine. Apart from that you did not say any other compelling mitigatory factors. However you pleaded guilty at the very out set saving the time of this court. The court is mindful that, at the same time offenders are punished with appropriate sentences, they should be given an opportunity to correct themselves too.
    
11. Accordingly I reduce the sentence by 12 months in each count for the mitigatory circumstances.
    
12. The sentencing and penalties Decree recognizes the following purposes of which the sentences should be imposed.
    
    1. To punish offenders to an extent and in manner which is just in all the circumstances
       
    2. To protect the community from offenders
       
    100. To deter offenders or other persons from committing offences of the same or similar nature
         
    4. To establish conditions so that rehabilitation of offenders may be promoted or facilitated
       
    5. To signify that the court and the community denounce the commission of such offences
       
13. I do not think the circumstances of this case and your previous conduct warrant this court to impose a lenient non custodial sentence on you since the court has a duty to protect the community from offenders like you. Secondly the court has to deter you and other persons from committing offences of this nature.
    
14. Accordingly I impose one year imprisonment on you for each count. Sentences should run concurrently.
    
15. You are eligible for parole after 6 months.
    

28 days to appeal.

Rangajeeva Wimalasena
Resident Magistrate

Lautoka
21.07.2010