HKSAR v. Jin Ren

HCMA001144/1997

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HONG KONG

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1144 OF 1997

____________

____________

Coram : The Hon. Madam Justice Beeson in Court

Date of Hearing : 10 February 1998

Date of Delivery of Judgment : 10 February 1998

_______________

J U D G M E N T

_______________

1. This is an appeal against sentences imposed on Appellant in the Magistracy for three charges, two relating to the possession of forged BNO passports, contrary to section 42(2)(c)(i) of the Immigration Ordinance and a third charge of making a false representation to an Immigration Assistant, contrary to section 42(1)(a) of the Immigration Ordinance.

2. Having considered the facts of the case, I am satisfied that the magistrate imposed perfectly proper sentences on the Defendant in this case. On review of her co-defendant's sentence the magistrate reduced the sentence to 6 months, taking account of the facts that the forged documents were not used and that the defendant (who was the son of this appellant and to whom the same facts pertained) could be treated as a passenger in transit. I should point out that the magistrate quite properly categorised these Defendants as coming within the second category of the case of The Queen v. Baghwant Singh-Padda. In giving leave to Appellant to appeal out of time, the magistrate indicated that he would have considered reducing her sentence if he had been able to and the application for review made by her had not been time-barred.

3. For that reason, I reduce the sentence to 6 months but I will point out that there are certain matters in this type of case that should be taken note of for future reference. First of all, these offences are becoming more prevalent and offenders can be looking at more serious terms for them. Second, where BNO passports are involved, the courts are likely to take a more serious view. And further, that in cases of this nature where there are several offences there does not appear to me to be any good reason why concurrent sentences should be passed, because the misrepresentation to the Immigration Officer in this situation is a completely separate offence unrelated to the possession of the BNO Passports - it related to Appellant's representation that she was departing for China.

4. To that extent, the Appellant and her co-defendant benefited from the magistrate's generosity in making the sentences concurrent. I reduce the sentence to 6 months in respect of the three offences. I order that they remain concurrent sentences.

Representation:

Johnny Chan, S.G.C., for D.P.P.

Mr. Keith Fung, instructed by M/s. S.Y. Fung for Appellant - Jin Ren