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

State v Marama [2012] FJMC 248; Criminal Case 562.2011 (3 July 2012)

IN THE MAGISTRATE'S COURT AT LAUTOKA

Criminal Case No 562/11

BETWEEN

THE STATE

AND

ASILIKA MARAMA

SENTENCE

1. You, Asilika Marama are to be sentenced upon pleading guilty to 17 counts of forgery contrary to Section 335(2)(a) of the Penal Code, 17 counts of uttering forged documents contrary to Section 343(1) of the Penal Code and 17 counts of obtaining money on forged documents contrary to Section 345 of the Penal Code.
   
2. The maximum The maximum punishment for these offences are as follows;
   

3. You were convicted for all 51 counts upon admitting the summary of facts. As per the summary of facts you were employed at Housing Authority as a front desk receptionist from 10th October 1991 to December 2010. In 1999 your father transferred the family house under your name and your brother's, who is the complainant in this case. Whilst being employed at the Housing Authority you mortgaged the family house without the knowledge of the Complainant and applied for soft loans by forging the signature of the Complainant. From 27th December 2012 to 31st December 2007 you obtained loans from the Housing Authority on forged documents in 17 instances. In 2010 the Complainant discovered that the house was mortgaged when he received a notice and the matter was reported to the Police. You have obtained 18,429 dollars in 17 occasions in this manner. You admitted the offences under caution.
   
4. I have observed the following aggravating factors;
   
   1. You committed these offences over a long period of time.
   2. You took the advantage of your employment with the Housing Authority.
   100. You breached the trust of your employer and your own brother.
   4. You misled the Housing Authority.
   5. You have obtained a considerable amount of money.
   6. You have committed these offences in a well planned and a premeditated manner.
   7. You mortgaged the house which belongs to the Complainant as well without his knowledge to eventuate these offences.
      
5. In mitigation the Legal Aid Counsel tendered written submissions on your behalf. You are 37 years old and married with 3 children. It was informed that you are currently unemployed and you have the obligation to look after the elderly parents and your younger sister. It was further informed that you are remorseful of your actions and that you seek forgiveness. Upon inquiry by Court you informed that your children are of the ages of 10, 16 and 17 years.
   
6. You are a first offender and pleaded guilty saving the court's time.
   
7. In this case I pick my starting point as 2 years for forgery, Uttering forged documents and for obtaining money on forged documents. For the aggravating factors I enhance each sentence by 12 months. For the mitigatory factors I reduce each sentence by 6 months. For the early plea I give you a one third discount for each count. Accordingly I arrive at 20 months imprisonment for each count.
   
8. It was not submitted by the prosecution or by the Defence that you have done any restitution. Thus it does not appear that you have expressed any genuine remorse by any attempt for reparation.
   
9. Justice Gates said in State V. Mahendra Prasad HAC009.02S that;
   

"where there is an earnest and sincere wish to effect reparation to the victim, and where that wish is prompt and an expression of remorse, a suspended sentence is not wrong in principal. It should be noted that suspension of sentence is only considered where an early restitution is made as true expression of remorse and not just an attempt to buy one's way out of prison. ( State V Cakau HAA125 of 2004S)."

10. You are a first offender. However Justice Nawana in in State v. Vilikesa Tilalevu and Savenaca Mataki HAC 081 OF 2010 stated that;
    

"I might add that the imposition of suspended terms on first offenders would infect the society with a situation - which I propose to invent as 'First Offender Syndrome' - where people would tempt to commit serious offences once in life under the firm belief that they would not get imprisonment in custody as they are first offenders. The resultant position is that the society is pervaded with crimes. Court must unreservedly guard itself against such a phenomenon, which is a near certainty if suspended terms are imposed on first offenders as a rule."

11. In the circumstances I do not think that the circumstances of the case warrant this Court to impose a non custodial sentence on you. However having considered your personal circumstances and specially the fact that you have young children, I decide to order all the sentences to run concurrent to each other.
    
12. Accordingly I impose 20 months imprisonment for each count from count one to count fifty one. Further I order all the sentences to run concurrently. Accordingly you should serve a total of 20 months imprisonment. You are eligible for parole after one year.
    

28 days to appeal.

Rangajeeva Wimalasena
Resident Magistrate
Lautoka

03.07.2012