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

Tiko v The State [1994] FJHC 101; HAU2021j.1994b (23 August 1994)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI
AT LABASA
APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 20 AND 21 OF 1994

Between:

KAMELI TIKO
Appellant

- and -

STATE
Respondent

Appellant in Person
M/s L. Laveti for the State

JUDGMENT

There are two appeals by the appellant and I shall deal with them together.

In Criminal Appeal No. 20/94 the appellant was on his own plea convicted and sentenced by the Labasa Magistrate's Court on 24 May 1994 in the First Count with the offence of Arson contrary to S.317 of the Penal Code and in the second count with the offence of larceny in dwelling-house contrary to section 270 of the Penal Code. He was sentenced to three years imprisonment and one year respectively on the two counts to be served concurrently.

In Criminal Appeal No. 21/94, on the same day the appellant was convicted and sentenced for the offence of robbery with violence. He was sentenced to imprisonment for 18 months to be served consecutive to the above sentence of three years making a total of 4 years 6 months imprisonment.

The appeals are against severity of sentence.

The appellant says that the total sentence imposed on him is excessive. He says that he is a first offender. He said that he lived in the house of the complainant and the reason for setting fire to it was because the owner did not pay him wages for 4 months and he lost his temper.

The learned State Counsel stated that she considers that looking at the total sentence of 4 years 6 months, the sentence for arson is on the high side. She referred the Court to the case of STATE v INIA VULAONO (Action No. 7/90) where JESURATNAM J passed a sentence of 15 months imprisonment.

The offences in Crim. App. No. 20/94 were committed on 14 May 1994 and the one in 21/94 was committed on 16 May 1994. The appellant was charged on 19 May 1994. The home was completely destroyed causing a damage of $5875.00. In VULAONO (supra) his Lordship said that "the fire he caused was extinguished in time with minimum damage before it could have reduced the entire shop to cinders in which event his punishment would have been much severer." In the circumstances of this case and bearing in mind the totality of sentence and the range of sentence in cases of arson, in my view the sentence for arson is slightly on the high side as the learned State Counsel also states. The other sentences are neither harsh or excessive nor wrong in principle.

I therefore set aside the sentence of 3 years for arson in Count two in Criminal Appeal No. 20/94 and in lieu thereof a sentence of two years three months imprisonment is substituted. The total sentence that the appellant will now serve is 3 years 9 months.

The appeal is allowed to the above extent.

D. Pathik
Judge

At Labasa
23 August 1994

HAU2021J.94B