PacLII Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback

Magistrates Court of Fiji

You are here:  PacLII >> Databases >> Magistrates Court of Fiji >> 2014 >> [2014] FJMC 110

Database Search | Name Search | Recent Decisions | Noteup | LawCite | Download | Help

State v Lal [2014] FJMC 110; Criminal Case 1742.2013 (24 February 2014)

IN THE MAGISTRATES COURT OF FIJI
AT SUVA


Criminal Case No: - 1742/2013


STATE


V


RAVINESH RONESH LAL


PC Josuha for the Prosecution
Mr. Rawuniwai for the Accused


SENTENCE


  1. RAVINESH RONESH LAL, you were charged in this Court for two counts of Obtaining Financial Advantage by Deception contrary to section 318 of the Crimes Decree No 44 of 2009.
  2. On the hearing date you changed your plea and pleaded guilty for these offences and also admitted the summary of facts presented by the prosecution.
  3. According to summary of facts on 26th July 2013 you obtained $200 from one Mohommed Sharfraz on the promise that you would sell a Samsung Galaxy Phone. Same day you also obtained same amount from one Deepak Somiya based on the promise to sell a Sony TV. You failed to fulfill both these promises.
  4. I am satisfied with your plea and convict you both these offences. .
  5. The maximum penalty for Theft is 10 years imprisonment.
  6. In State v Atil Sharma [HAC 122 of 2010] his Lordship Justice Madigan has set the tariff for obtaining Financial Advant1ge by Deception
  7. This court finds no aggravating factors in this case case .
  8. Mitigating factors are married being the sole bread winner, first offender , seeks forgiveness, remorseful, saved Court's time by pleading guilty and full restitution .
  9. In this case I select 03 years as my starting point for both counts and deduct 02 years to reach 01 year imprisonment.
  10. In State v Raymond Roberts ( HAA0053 of 2003S), Madam Shameem held that

" the principles that emerge from these cases are that a custodial sentence is inevitable where the accused pleaded not guilty and makes no attempt at genuine restitution. Where there is a plea of guilty, a custodial sentence may still be inevitable where there is a bad breach of trust, the money stolen is high in value and the accused shows no remorse or attempt at reparation".


  1. You pleaded guilty and made restitution. Also you have no prior convictions . Based on all these factors I believe you need a second chance.
  2. Accordingly for both these offences your final sentence stands at 01 year and this is suspended for 02 years.
  3. If you commit any offence punishable by prison sentence during the next 02 years you can be charged under section 28 of the Sentencing and Penalties Decree.
  4. 28 days to appeal

25th February 2014


H.S.P.Somaratne
Resident Magistrate, Suva


PacLII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback
URL: http://www.paclii.org/fj/cases/FJMC/2014/110.html