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

Ali Junior v The State [2003] FJHC 141; HAA0039J.2003S (3 October 2003)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI
AT SUVA
APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: HAA0039 OF 2003S

Between:

NUR ALI JUNIOR
Appellant

And:

THE STATE
Respondent

Hearing: 26th September 2003
Judgment: 3rd October 2003

Counsel: Appellant in Person
Mr. D. Toganivalu for State

JUDGMENT

The Appellant was charged with the following offence:

Statement of Offence

ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE: Contrary to Section 293(1)(b) of the Penal Code Act 17.

Particulars of Offence

NUR ALI JUNIOR s/o Nur Ali and MOHAMMED ZAINAL s/o Mohammed Kasim on the 30th day of May 2003 at Suva in the Central Division, robbed Michelle Berry of cash AUD$1000.00, FJ$100.00, mobilefone valued AUD$1000.00, gold chain valued AUD$100.00 and assorted items valued AUD$1202.00 to the total value of AUD$3502.00, the property of the said Michelle Berry and at the time of such robbery used personal violence on the said Michelle Berry.

He pleaded guilty to the charge on the 3rd of June 2003. He was represented by counsel.

The facts were that on the 30th of May 2003, the complainant was returning to the Holiday Inn from the city centre. As she waited to cross the road at the NLTB building a private motor vehicle DT997 drove past. The Appellant was a passenger in that vehicle. He leaned out of the car and grabbed the complainant’s handbag. She held on to it and was dragged along the road. She fell and the Appellant managed to take possession of the bag. It contained the items named in the charge, to the total value of AUS$3502. A bystander came to the assistance of the complainant and took her to the police station. The Appellant was traced and searched. Items to the value of $2,262 were recovered. The medical report of the complainant shows that she was bruised and scratched on her wrist, elbow, hand, stomach, knees and feet.

The Appellant admitted these facts and 9 previous convictions for offences of dishonesty and breaking-in between 1996 and 1998. In mitigation he said he wanted to borrow matches from the complainant. Counsel said that he was drunk at the time, as was the complainant and that the missing items had been thrown away into the sea. He said the Appellant was remorseful and asked for a suspended sentence.

The learned Magistrate correctly identified the tariff for offences of robbery with violence and started a 7 years imprisonment. After deducting for the guilty plea, he arrived at a sentence of 5 years imprisonment.

I do not consider that he erred. The dragging of the complainant, the remorseless grabbing of the bag, and the throwing away of some of the items were all aggravating factors which must have led to a sentence of some length. Further, the complainant (who was apparently a tourist) suffered injuries as a result of the robbery. The guilty plea led to a substantial deduction.

In all the circumstances the sentence of 5 years imprisonment is not manifestly excessive. This appeal is dismissed.

Nazhat Shameem
JUDGE

At Suva
3rd October 2003