IN THE MAGISTRATE'S COURT AT NASINU

Criminal Case No. 1093/2009

STATE

-v-

RAGINALD KILA

For Prosecution: PC Ravi Narayan 
For the accused: in person 

SENTENCE

1. You, RAGINALD KILA, are here, to be sentenced on admission of guilt on your own accord for the following offence namely:

CHARGE:

Statement of Offence [a]

Receiving stolen property: Contrary to section 313(1) of the Penal Code Act 17.

Particulars of Offence [b]
RAGINALD KILA on the 1st day of September, 2009 at Nasinu in the Central Division did receive one dual sim phone spider brand from one TUIMASI knowing the same to be stolen.
At the trial the prosecution amended the charge. They you pleaded guilty to the amended charge. I am satisfied with your plea is unequivocal and that you understand the repercussion of your plea. I convict you as charged.

2. According to the facts, (which you have admitted), Accused, Raginald Kila, B1, 21 years, unemployed of Lot 11, Cakacaka Road, Caubati received a dual sim fone spider brand valued at $1,200.00 to the total value of $1,200, knowing it to be stolen the property of Francis Waqasaqa, PW1, 28 years, LICI Sales Agent of Dokanasuva. 1st day of September 2009 at about 0600 hours, PW1 and B1 were drinking beer with other friends at Cunningham. After drinking they fell off to sleep. PW1 had left her mobile phone inside her friends bag. When she woke up the next morning she found the mobile phone missing. PW1 then enquired from B1 about her mobile phone. B1 replied that he had given it to his wife, which he bought from one Tuimasi for $20.00. Matter was reported at Valelevu Police Station. B1 was arrested interviewed under cautioned and admitted receiving the mobile phone refers to Q.15. B1 was then charged for the offence.

3. Maximum penalty to this offence is as follows; 

"313.-(1) Any person who receives any property knowing the same to have been stolen or obtained in any way whatsoever under circumstances which amount to felony or misdemeanour, is guilty of an offence of the like degree (whether felony or misdemeanour) and is liable-

(a) in the case of felony, to imprisonment for fourteen years; and
(b) in the case of misdemeanour, to imprisonment for seven years."
.
4. In Mohammed Khalil & Vijay Singh v Reginam [1978] SCHAA 10& 11/78B 19 May1978. Grant CJ considered 1 year imprisonment for receiving on early plea and young offender who pawned the articles. 

5. There are no aggravating factors. 

6. You are a fresh offender.

7. Considering your early plea and value of property, I select 1 year imprisonment as starting point in respect of this offence.

8. You pleaded guilty for the charge at the first instance. Therefore, you are entitled for reduction of your sentence. I am giving the benefit of ⅓ as set out in Veretariki Vetaukula vs The State, High Court Crim App Case No: HAA057/07, followed in Hem Dutt vs The State, FCA Crim App Case No: AAU 0066 of 2005 and Aliki Vilimoni vs State, FJHC 12; HAA 131-132, 2007. Now your sentence is 9 months.

9. In mitigation, you said that you are 24 years old; married with 3 kids, employed by water authority Fiji, you earn $150 per week. You are sole bread winner of the family; you asked court's forgiveness and leniency, promised not to re offend.

10. For you mitigating factors I reduce another 3 months. Now your sentence is 6 months imprisonment. 

11. Considering value of the property, your propensity to do crimes again and mitigation I suspended it for 2 years. If you committed another offence during the operation of suspended sentence, this 6 month sentence will be activated. You are given final chance and severely warned not re-offend.

12. In addition, under the section 31(1) of the Sentencing and Penalties Decree No 42 0f 2009 I impose fine of FJD 50 on you and in default 10 days imprisonment. 28 days to pay the fine.

This is your sentence: 6 months imprisonment suspended for 2 years and $ 50 fine.

13. 28 days to appeal.

On 12th June 2012 at Nasinu, Fiji Islands

Sumudu Premachandra
Resident Magistrate