Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback Magistrates Court of Solomon Islands

R v Sausi [2025] SBMC 2; Criminal Case 694 of 2025 (26 August 2025)

IN THE SOLOMON ISLANDS MAGISTRATES’ COURT

AT TULAGI, CENTRAL ISLAND PROVINCE

Criminal Case No. 694 of 2025

REGINA

v.

SERAH SAUSI

Ms. Habu. S for the Crown.

Mr. Maelanga. K for the Accused.

Date of Sentencing Submissions: 30 July 2025

Date of further submissions: 1 August 2025

Date of Sentence: 5 August 2025

Date of Written Sentence: 26 August 2025

PM Fagani,

SENTENCE

Introduction

1. The defendant, Serah Sausi is charged with one count of house breaking and commit felony. She arraigned and pleaded guilty to that offence. Upon her guilty plea, I will enter conviction against her. This morning, the defendant appears before this court for her sentence.

Agreed Facts

2. It is alleged that on 6 April 2025, between 9:00pm to 12:00am, the defendant did break and enter the dwelling house of the complainant.
   

First incident

3. The first incident occurred when the defendant climbed the complainant house, removed 2 lover glasses from the window, then proceeds to enter the house. The complainant’s son was sleeping in his room and heard a noise in the other room. He then walked to that room and saw the defendant. He knew it was the defendant because he called out her name to which the defendant responded. After the defendant was responded, she escaped out the same window she used to come in, and ran on the roof top of the complainant kitchen.
   

Second incident

4. The second incident occurred at 12:00am where the defendant climbed and entered the complainant’s house through the same window. The defendant roomed a timber on the complainant canteen floor. The complainant son witnessed the defendant and call his father, in which he came and got hold on to the defendant. The matter was reported to the police and the defendant was charged with one count of house breaking and commit felony contrary to section 300(a) of the Penal Code [Cap 26]^[1].

Aggravating Factors

5. The aggravating factors which can be seen in this case are.
   • 5.1 Firstly, the maximum penalty for the offence is very serious. The maximum penalty for this offence is 14 years imprisonment and this means the offence itself is very serious once committed^[2].
   • 5.2 Secondly, the offending was repetitive. From the facts, I note there are two occasion the defendant entered the complainant’s house to commit the offence. The first incident is where she entered the house by removing 2 lover glasses but caught and escaped by the complainant’s son. The second occasion is where she also entered through the same window and get caught by the complainant.
   • 5.3 The offence was committed at night.
   • 5.4 There is premeditation in this case. The way the defendant entered the building twice indicated that she has clear intention or plan to commit the offence.

Mitigating Factors

6. For the mitigation factors, the court take into account the following mitigating factors.
   • 6.1 The defendant entered an early guilty plea.
   • 6.2 She was remorseful.
   • 6.3 She has no previous conviction.
   • 6.4 She was co-operating well with the police.
   • 6.5 I take into account the personal circumstances of the defendant. She is 19 years of age, married and currently pregnant.

Discussion

7. House breaking and commit felony is a serious offence in our jurisdiction. As stated earlier, the maximum penalty for this offence is 14 years imprisonment. By looking at the maximum penalty, both can agree that the offence is very serious, and because of its seriousness, it attracts an immediate custodial sentence.
   
8. In Paroke & Kuper v R, Muria ACJ stated at page 2^[3]:
   

'In cases of serious crimes, and housebreaking is such a crime, the courts must reflect the seriousness of crimes in the sentences they pass....'

9. Prosecution submits for the court to impose a custodial sentence on the defendant. In support of the submissions, prosecution relied on cases that deals with such an offence and also deals with the circumstances of the defendant, being pregnant.
   
10. Defence on the other hand, submit for the court to impose a lenient sentence, taking into account the circumstances that the defendant is pregnant.
    
11. I had the opportunity to consider the submission and consider the seriousness of offence, circumstances surrounding the offending and the personal circumstances of the defendant. I am of the view, that a custodial sentence is appropriate in this case. I will impose a starting point of 24 months imprisonment to reflect the seriousness of the offence.
    
12. Considering the circumstances of the defendant that she is pregnant, I had the opportunity to consider the case of Ashley v R^[4]. I note the defendant in that case was pregnant, but the court imposed a sentence of 4 months 4 days imprisonment.
    
13. I also take into account the case of Pokana v R^[5], where the defendant is pregnant and the court impose a sentence of 6 months imprisonment.
    
14. Not only that, but the court also had the opportunity to consider the case of R v Malasa^[6], where the defendant was also pregnant, the court imposed 2 years imprisonment but partially suspended the sentence, given the defendant already served part of the sentence in custody.
    
15. When considering the cases above, obviously, being pregnant, I would say that it is not a shield to protect the defendant from going to prison. In the cases above, I note the defendant were charged with serious offence with similar circumstance however, the court impose imprisonment on the defendant. I am of the view, that this case should not be treated differently from the cases above. The defendant must also serve whatever custodial sentence impose by this court.
    
16. In terms of sentence consideration, I will add 6 months imprisonment on the starting point to reflect the aggravating factors in this case. On the other hand, I note at the outset of the case, the defendant was arraigned and entered an early guilty plea to the charge. As stated in Qolani v R^[7], I will deduct 9 months imprisonment for the early guilty plea. For the other mitigating factors, I will also further deduct 6 months imprisonment.
    
17. Regarding the personal circumstance of the defendant that she is pregnant when committing the offence and considering her pregnancy; I will further deduct another 6 months imprisonment as well. Therefore, the resulting sentence would be 9 months imprisonment. I believe the sentence is appropriate to be imposed on the defendant.
    
18. I must say that I feel sorry for the defendant and the innocent unborn child for the experience that they will go through in prison, but being a mother, that is what she should have thought about at the first place, before committing the offence. I note from the facts, the defendant committed the offence when she was already 4 months pregnant. If the defendant thinks seriously about her, the unborn child and her family, she should stay away from such an unlawful action. However, here, I do not see the defendant ever thought about the consequences.
    
19. To deter the defendant, I am of the view that the custodial sentence is appropriate. Not only that, but it also sends clear message to the public that any likeminded who thought of committing such an offence must stop. Having say that, and taking into account the aggravating factors, mitigating factors, the circumstances surrounding the offending and the personal circumstances of the defendant, I will now make these following orders:

Order

1. I hereby sentence the defendant Ms. Serah Sausi to 9 months imprisonment. Time spent in custody to be deducted.
2. I enter conviction against the defendant.
3. Right of appeal within 14 days.
4. Order According.
   

THE COURT

.................................................
MR. MICHAEL FAGANI
Principal Magistrate

^[1] See section 300(a) of the Penal Code [Cap 26].
^[2] See R v Kemakeza [2008] SBHC 41.
^[3] See Paroke & Kuper v R (Unrep. Criminal Case No. 21 of 1992).
^[4] See Pokana v R [2008] SBHC 99; HCSI-CRC 116 of 2008 (14 November 2008).
^[5] See Ashley v Regina [2006] SBHC 128; HCSI-CRC No 412 of 2006 (15 November 2006).
^[6] See Regina v Malasa [2010] SBHC 8; HCSI-CRC 84 of 2010 (1 April 2010).
^[7] See Qoloni v Regina [2005] SBHC 73; HCSI-CRC 076 of 2005 (21 June 2005).