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

State v Chand [2010] FJHC 396; HAC032.2008 (21 July 2010)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI
AT LAUTOKA
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. HAC 032 OF 2008

STATE

V

RONALD RITESH CHAND
s/o Ramesh Chand

Mr. T. Qalinauci for the State
Accused in Person

Date of Hearing: 19 July 2010
Date of Sentence: 21 July 2010

SENTENCE

[1] The accused pleaded guilty in this Court on the 19th July 2010 to one offence of unlawful possession of illicit drugs, the offence being charged as follows:

Statement of Offence

UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF ILLICIT DRUGS: Contrary to Section 5(a) of Illicit Drugs Control Act No. 9 of 2004.

Particulars of Offence

RONALD RITESH CHAND, on the 11th day of May 2008 at Tubairatu, Navosa in the Western Division, without lawful authority possessed 1845.8 grams of cannabis, an illegal drug.

Facts

[2] On the 11th May 2008 at about 4.00am at Tubairatu Valley Road, the accused also known as "Tete" was travelling in a vehicle with two others. When stopped, Police discovered the accused in the back seat and next to him a sack containing dried leaves believed to be cannabis. The accused admitted that the sack belonged to him. The contents of the sack were analysed by the Government Chemist and found to be 1845.8 grams of cannabis sativa, an illicit drug. The accused was interviewed under caution when he admitted that it was left over from his planting and that it was worth approximately $700. He further said that he was taking the drugs to Sigatoka for sale.

[3] The accused admitted those facts before me and was convicted. He tells me that he is 23 years old, a farmer and single, taking care of an aged father. He is remorseful and begs for forgiveness, stressing that he will never deal in the drugs trade again. Of course his strongest point of mitigation is his plea of guilty, albeit 2 years after his first appearance.

[4] Counsel for the State has filed detailed and helpful written submissions on sentence.

[5] In State v Roko – HAC 160/2007, Goundar J. sentenced an accused possessing a similar amount of cannabis to 4 years after trial. Again in State v Koroivuki – HAC 13/2008, P. Fernando J. sentenced the accused possessing 1808 grams to 5 years after trial.

[6] This accused has recently in this Court been convicted and sentenced after trial to the cultivation of a very large number of cannabis plants, and it is not therefore appropriate that any aggravation of growing should attach to this offence. He must be sentenced on the facts of this case alone. However it is an aggravating feature that he was transporting the drugs for sale to a named buyer, and to that extent his possession was for commercial supply.

[7] I take a starting point of 4 ½ years and add 18 months for the commercial supply factor making 6 years. For his strong mitigating features, including remorse, his relatively young age and not the least his plea of guilty I deduct 2 years making a total sentence of 4 years. Allowance for time spent on remand awaiting trial has already been afforded to him in the sentence passed on him last week in HAC 4/2010.

[8] By the terms of section 22(1) of the Sentencing and Penalties Decree 2009, this sentence is to be served concurrently with the sentence of 8 years 6 months that he is already serving.

[9] Given that he is already serving a minimum term of 5 ½ years, it would be meaningless for me to set a minimum term in this particular case.

[10] The term of imprisonment is four years concurrent to the sentence being served.

[11] The drugs are to be destroyed and a certificate lodged in this Court to that effect within 14 days.

[12] The convict has 30 days to appeal.

Paul K. Madigan
Judge

At Lautoka
21 July 2010