R. v. Fijisimundi s/o Komba, Crim. Rev. 25-DDM-72 , 3/7/72.

R. v. Fijisimundi s/o Komba, Crim. Rev. 25-DDM-72 , 3/7/72.

            MNZAVAS, J. – The accused was on his own plea of guilty convicted of escaping from lawful custody c/s 116 of the Penal Code and sentenced to 10 months’ imprisonment. In admitting the case for revision Kwikima Ag. J. minuted “Sentence manifestly excessive. To be revised”.

            Before me the learned state attorney has argued that the sentence of 10 months imprisonment could not be said to be so excessive as to warrant interference by this court because, he said, the accused was in custody charged with serious offences, namely burglary and insulting the modesty of a woman c/ss 294 and 135(3) of the Penal Code.

            With respect to the learned state attorney I do not think that the nature of the charge or charges against an escapee have any relevance regarding  what type of punishment should be imposed on him if he escapes from lawful custody. The charges at the time of his escaping from lawful custody are at the very most mere allegations against him. The allegations could or could not be true depending on the evidence which the prosecution would bring before the court at a later date.

            It is therefore most improper to say that because the charges against the escapee were serious his escaping from lawful custody should be severely punished.

            From the record the accused was a first offender. The offence is a misdemeanor and the accused readily pleaded guilty.

            These being the facts I agree with my learned brother judge that the sentence of 10 months imprisonment was manifestly excessive. The sentence is reduced to one of 4 months imprisonment only.