N11545

PAPUA NEW GUINEA
[NATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]

CR 311 & 312 OF 2025

THE STATE

V

ALU PETER & BENJAMIN ANDIKI

WAIGANI: MIVIRI J
18 AUGUST, 03, 04 SEPTEMBER 2025

CRIMINAL LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Unlawful Assault Bodily harm S340 – GBH S319 CCA – Plea x2 – Stabbed with Screwdriver – Hit on Head Multiple Times with Iron Rod – Serious Life-Threatening Injury – No Residual Injuries – Stabbed On the Back – Attack In Public Market & Bus Stop – Victim Attacked When Taking Matter to Police – Prevalent Offence – Law Into Own Hands –18 months for Assault Occasioning Bodily Harm & 3 years IHL for GBH.

Facts
Prisoners in company jointly aided and abetted each other in stabbing the victim with a screwdriver and hitting him on the head multiple times with an iron rod. Victim refused to engage the services of the prisoner to carry his market produce who retaliated against his refusal.

Held
Bruises on body first assault.
Second assault penetrating stab wounds
And multiple Bumps to the head
Expression of Remorse.
First time offenders
Plea
18 months IHL first Count
Both prisoners
3 years IHL second count.
Cumulative for A Peter 
minus remand.

Cases cited
Acting Public Prosecutor v Haha [1981] PNGLR 205
Simbe v The State [1994] PNGLR 38
Golu v The State [1979] PNGLR 653
State v Irowen [2002] PGNC 99; N2239 
Mangaea v State [2022] PGSC 129; SC2324 
Public Prosecutor v Hale [1998] PGSC 26; SC564 
Kumbamong v State [2008] PGSC 51; SC1017 
Public Prosecutor v Tardrew [1986] PNGLR 91

Counsel
S. Wak & T Aihi, for the State	
I. Kaiap, for the defendant

SENTENCE

1.	MIVIRI J: This is the sentence after a guilty plea entered by both Alu Peter and Benjamin Andiki that they on the 13th day of November 2024 at Boroko Market in Port Moresby unlawfully assaulted Henry Iluba causing him bodily harm contrary to section 340 of the Criminal code. 

2.	That section is in the following terms: 

Assaults Occasioning Bodily Harm
(1) A person who unlawfully assaults another and by doing so does him bodily harm is guilty of a misdemeanour.

Penalty: Imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years.

3.	The facts arraigned were that on the 13th November 2024 around 7.00am at the Boroko Market Henry Iluba bought some coconut. He packed them into a bag when the two Accused Alu Peter and Benjamin Andiki approached him. They offered to help carry the coconuts, but Henry Iluba refused as he had no money to pay them. They resisted and an argument ensued between them. It escalated into a fight where punches were exchanged. The other cargo carriers at the market joined the two (2) co Accused in the assault. As a result, Henry Iluba sustained bruises on his face and other parts of his body.

4.	This is the offence that was the pathway to the latter offence of grievous bodily harm. And the relevant facts on arraignment were that on the 15th November 2024 around 7.00am, Henry Iluba went back to Boroko Market to look for the assailants so they could resolve the matter at Boroko Police Station. He saw Alu Peter and asked him to go with him to the Police station. The Accused followed Henry Iluba out. When they were exiting the gate towards Boroko Police Station, Alu Peter called out to his friends. The Accused and his friends approached Henry Iluba and started attacking him. Henry Iluba ran into a route 9 PMV. They followed him into the bus and stabbed him in his back three (3) times with a screwdriver and hit him on the head multiple times with a metal rod. As a result of the injuries inflicted on his body, he was unconscious until he woke up at the hospital hours later. 

5.	The medical report revealed that the complainant sustained mid moderated head injury with multiple back penetrating wounds secondary to physical assault. He was given medication and kept overnight for observation and for referral to Port Moresby General Hospital for CT scan and surgical intervention.

6.	Both pleaded guilty to the assault occasioning bodily harm which draw a maximum sentence of 3 years imprisonment. Alu Peter was 19 years old whose mother was from Simbu and father from Hela Province. He was resident with the parents at Tariban Settlement at East Boroko. A first offender he was educated to grade 9 to 10 at Badihagwa High School in 2023. He did not continue his education further, so he was intent on means to make money when he committed the offence. With no employment experience he was a first-time offender who had pleaded guilty to the crime. It was a serious offence, and his family were willing to compensation. Amount was not disclosed in the presentence report that was ordered. It also was an offence where the family was drawn in innocent to save the prisoner. 

7.	In the case of Benjamin Adiki, he is 20 years old originally from Tari in Hela Province. He too like his co prisoner is resident at Tariban settlement East Boroko. He too has education level of grade 10 at Tokarara High School which he did not complete. He does not have any formal working experience. He too has a family who have pledged to support him to pay compensation to the complainant. He committed the offence and must bear responsibility to make good what he has done. Together with his co prisoner they assaulted the complainant. And caused him bodily harm. The offence carries a maximum penalty of a term not exceeding 3 years imprisonment. 

8.	Both are first-time offenders who have pleaded guilty. Each has spent time in custody awaiting trial of the offence. They demonstrated an attitude problem that is rampant in all the markets in the city. Youth who force themselves upon other citizens such as the victim intent on making lives by selling garden produce. That is not the way and should never be the way to make earnings to sustain a living. Every man, women child is a free person and should not be forced to spend money where they feel they should not spend. The complainant did not have the means to sustain other than to sell and earn to sustain. The prisoners were wrong to exert their will upon him. His refusal landed him into very serious assault causing bodily harm. Then he sought to take the matter to law enforcement which he was entitled to do. But landed himself with a very serious almost near-death experience. It was an attack in a public frequented area determined and pursued to the injuries the complainant received. In that respect I consider submission following Acting Public Prosecutor v Haha [1981] PNGLR 205 on point by the State, that time demarcates the offences. It is not a one transaction because of that fact. And therefore, will be due the prisoner Alu Peter cumulative from the Assault causing Bodily harm.

9.	And their facts and circumstances will sum the proportionate sentence due both for the crime: Simbe v The State [1994] PNGLR 38. In effect it means sentence must fit the crime that they have committed, Golu v The State [1979] PNGLR 653. They could draw the maximum imprisonment term for each crime convicted. Comparably their cases do not warrant. This court considered 7 years cumulative for grievous bodily harm in State v Irowen [2002] PGNC 99; N2239, Two wives of the prisoner were cut with a bush knife almost killing them, but they survived because they were taken quickly to the hospital but came out with serious residual injuries. Both were undressed naked accused of adultery by the prisoner cut by bush knife almost killing both. If that is the measure the assault occasioning bodily harm of the prisoners jointly severely will not meet because the maximum is three (3) years imprisonment for the offence.

10.	First offenders pleading guilty accepting responsibility for the wrong against society must in return be accorded favourably, but subject to the individual facts and circumstances. If the aggravation outweighs then, appropriate proportional penalty be accorded to accommodate. Justice is served without emotion. And here it is clear that both must serve time in jail because the offence is committed in a public place without regard, deterrence and restraint of that fact. There is no respect for law and order, and it is no light matter when young men aged as the prisoners are taking the law into their own hands and act as here. The guilty pleas and that they are first offenders do not discount the gravity of the offence. Many publicans frequent the markets and shops. They must feel free to move around and be not the subject of what the prisoners did here. Living means taking what the complainant did at there should not be any risks in the manner demonstrated by the prisoners. Life does not come on a golden plate from the sky. Deterrence must be reflected in the sentence that is passed. 

11.	But they are young men who because of the guilty pleas must be given time to amend their ways to fit back into society. I consider that the fair and proportionate sentence given would be 18 months imprisonment in Hard labour for the offence of assault occasioning bodily harm committed by the prisoners jointly severely upon Henry Iluba. It was a group attack against a single person who did not invite that attack. And the consequences of such is rampant across country prevalent. Sentence has always reflected that gravity: Mangaea v State [2022] PGSC 129; SC2324 (24 November 2022). Because death and serious injuries are there in the event of an attack in this manner. This sentence will reflect that fact against both prisoners but for their guilty pleas.

12.	I am not swayed and bound by the other Judgements of this Court cited by counsel. They are peculiar to the facts of the individual cases and do not have blanket effect to the matter before me now. The assaults here are serious because they are repeated days apart. And Alu Peter repeats without any justification accompanied by others in a group attack at a public frequented market and bus stop, Boroko. And seriously so because the complainant is stabbed and hit on the head after being chased into a public bus stop, into a bus and stabbed hit there repeatedly. For the assault occasioning bodily harm, I sentence the prisoners Alu Peter and Benjamin Andiki for that crime convicted upon Henry Iluba committed on the 13th day of November 2024 at Boroko Market in Port Moresby to 18 months imprisonment in hard labour. Time in custody is deducted forthwith. The balance is suspended on an 18 months GBB for both prisoners. I make no orders for both prisoners to enter into probation as I do not have the material here by the probation order to make that order: Public Prosecutor v Hale [1998] PGSC 26; SC564. It would not be proportionate to the gravity of the offence.

13.	I now come to Alu Peter pleaded guilty that he on the 15th Day of 2024 at Boroko Market in Port Moresby unlawfully did grievous harm upon Henry Iluba contrary to section 319 of the Criminal Code.

14.	Which section is in the following:

 “A person who unlawfully does grievous bodily harm to another person is guilty of a crime.
Penalty: Imprisonment for a term not exceeding seven years.”

15.	I reiterate that his sentence will not be seven (7) as it is not by its facts the most serious offence of that kind. True it was a life-threatening injury but there is no evidence medically that it has now carried on in the way and life of the complainant. But violence has no place in a public place and resort must always be to the law for resolving. And here the prisoner is not the law unto himself. He must adhere to the rule of the law. His action will draw the strong arm of the law to instil order amongst persons such as he who are like minded to enter this domain of lawlessness. Grievous means life threatening because in the specifics here stabbing a person on the back means no defence for that person. He cannot defend himself. Here he is pursued like an animal to be slaughtered killed and eaten into out of a public market into a public bus stop, at Boroko. Would he fit a non-custodial term given or a part suspended term for the same. I consider the submissions to follow other similar cases do not come on par with the facts before me. I sentence based on my facts and circumstances not by tariff and range slavishly: Kumbamong v State [2008] PGSC 51; SC1017 

16.	I am not fortified by the material in the presentence report to go along the path of a suspended term. There is nothing in the presentence report warranting as basis to go along that path. Alternatives to imprisonment must come with workable solutions that can be checked on the progress of the prisoner so sentenced. It is not a research paper but a working document that will deliver justice both to the State society and the prisoner individually. I am not convinced nor have the basis to warrant orders in that line here: Public Prosecutor v Tardrew [1986] PNGLR 91.

17.	Hence the sentence is as set that the Prisoner Alu Peter is hereby sentenced to three (3) years IHL in jail. That will be served cumulative to the sentence for assault occasioning bodily Harm. The total sentence is deducted from the time in custody. He will spend the remaining time in custody forthwith. 

Ordered Accordingly
__________________________________________________________________
 Lawyer for the State: Public Prosecutor
Lawyer for the defendant: Public Solicitor