HKSAR v. Raskoti Naresh
|
DCCC 1629/2025 [2026] HKDC 1032 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION CRIMINAL CASE NO 1629 OF 2025 ________________________
________________________
________________________ REASONS FOR SENTENCE ________________________ 1.The defendant has pleaded guilty today to 2 offences of blackmail, 1 assault of assault occasioning actual bodily harm and 1 offence of false imprisonment. All the offences relate to incident that occurred in Yuen Long against what appear to be a Nepali community people on 28 April 2025 and 1 May 2025. The first set of incidents relate to what occurred on the evening of 28 April, where an offence of blackmail and assault occasioning actual bodily harm occurred. 2.The Brief Facts of those offences in respect, firstly, of the blackmail offence which is charge 2, is that the victim was inside a store in Yuen Long and the defendant arrived on a bicycle. He was carrying what is described as a stick-like object about one metre long wrapped in green canvas. On entering the store, the defendant demanded $10,000 from the victim which was refused. The defendant then struck the victim with the stick-like object. The screen captures of that can be seen on CCTV, the screen captures provided to the court. The victim used his arm to fend off the attack and the blow landed on the victim’s right fingers. After that, the defendant ran out of the store, said he would come back and ask for money again and if he refused to pay on the next occasion then another assault would occur. The defendant then fled the scene and the matter was reported to police. The victim suffered some right hand tenderness over a joint on his right hand. 3.Now, the same day shortly after about one hour later at 8:30 pm, the second offence occurred which is the offence of assault occasioning actual bodily harm. The defendant walked into another store where PW2 was, holding the same stick-like object. There was also another male, who is not subject to any proceedings in this court that I know of, was following the defendant on a bicycle. The defendant walked into the store and assaulted the second victim with the stick-like object, asked him for money as well. The defendant ran out of the store and was followed by the victim. A further assault occurred and then another man approached PW2 and struck him on the back. There was some resistance. The police were called and the defendant was arrested for the offences of blackmail and assault occasioning bodily harm and remained silent. The victim in this assault had tenderness over his left forearm and tenderness over his left dorsal hand. 4.The defendant, I presume, was released on bail after that because on 1 May 2025, he continues these series of offences by apparently victimising a family also in Yuen Long on the evening of that day and this is where the final offence that I am dealing with occurred which is the offences of false imprisonment and a further offence of blackmail. The victim, PW3, was having a family gathering at the residence. A person knocked on the door, the victim, PW3, opened the main door, saw the defendant outside. The defendant asked for $5,000 and said if he did not get paid he would kill the victim. She, understandably, was frightened and closed the door. 5.She heard a commotion outside the residence, she looked at the livestream on the CCTV. She saw the defendant squatting down in front of the metal gate, coiling wires at the bottom left corner of the gate. Another man arrived and used a mobile phone to take photographs of the metal gate. PW3 called her husband for help. The case was reported to the police via the landlord. 6.The defendant was then seen to be dragging a rubbish bin towards the metal gate, stood at the rubbish bin and affixed a password-protected lock to the left corner of the metal gate, thereby imprisoning PW3 within her residence. Police arrived and intercepted the defendant and the other male and recovered the wires and password padlock as exhibits. A search of the defendant found the password of the padlock inside his trouser pocket. The defendant was arrested and remained silent under caution. Again, further CCTV recorded that that incident occurred and the defendant has on the basis of these Admitted Facts been convicted of those offences. 7.The defendant’s antecedents have been produced which show on a personal level at the time the antecedents were taken he was aged 34. He had a home address in Yuen Long. His place of birth is Nepal. Completed Form 5 level at a secondary school in Nepal. His previous convictions are all admitted and show a history of drug-taking, his first conviction of possession of a dangerous drug in 2011, further convictions of possession of pipes and equipment in 2017. He attempted to commit a robbery in 2020 and received 4 years’ imprisonment. Subsequent to that, a further offence of possession of an offensive weapon in 2025 where he received a sentence of 4 months’ imprisonment and then we have the incidents that occurred in April or May of 2025 that I am dealing with today. 8.Personal mitigation advanced by Mr Raffell today is the defendant said at the time when this mitigation was put forward, he was a 33-year-old Nepalese National, a Hong Kong Permanent Resident, lives with his wife, two young children and his father in Yuen Long. All his family members are Hong Kong Permanent Residents. He received his education to secondary form level in Nepal and has worked as a casual construction worker in Hong Kong. 9.As far as mitigation that is actually put forward, the defendant is pleading in mitigation his acceptance and responsibility by his pleas of guilty. I note that the defendant has also had been remanded in custody since these incidents took place in May 2025. Perhaps had he been remanded in custody in April 2025 these second set of offences might not have occurred. 10.I note that little explanations been offered for why these offences occurred but they occurred within or would appear to be a Nepalese community within Yuen Long and I am told that the defendant were known to the victims. 11.In a case such as this the court must determine the initial starting point for sentence on these offences having regard to the seriousness of the offences and the defendant’s personal background. I have been given a helpful set of authorities by the defence but I think the sentencing range for these offences is well-known. As far as the assault occasioning actual bodily harm charged, there is a maximum sentence of 3 years’ imprisonment. Imprisonment is often appropriate for offences of this nature. This is a relatively low level assault occasioning actual bodily harm case in that the injuries on the victims appears to be simply “tenderness”. 12.As far as the charges 2 and 4, the blackmails, are concerned, this is a serious offence with lengthy sentence often imposed. A maximum sentence of 14 years’ imprisonment can be imposed for these offences. Offence sentences can exceed a starting point of 3 years’ imprisonment. It is suggested in migration that a realistic starting point for a charge such as this, given the facts of the case, would be in the range of 2 to 3 years’ imprisonment. 13.Similarly, the charge 5, false imprisonment, at common law carries a maximum sentence of some 7 years’ imprisonment and sentences of imprisonment are often imposed for that offence. 14.Given that there are 4 sentences that I must impose and they occurred at different times on different days, the question will arise as to how those sentences should be served, whether they should be served consecutively or concurrently, so it is important for the court to arrive at an overall total sentence and then have a regard to the defendant’s plea of guilty and reduce that by the appropriate amount. 15.What I shall do firstly is tell the defendant now the actual sentence I will impose on each charge. The 2nd charge, an offence of blackmail committed against the victim, I am going to take a starting point of 30 months of imprisonment and reduce that to 20 months’ imprisonment for the defendant’s plea of guilty. 16.On the 3rd charge, the offence of assault occasioning actual bodily harm, I shall take a starting point of 9 months of imprisonment, reduce that to 6 months’ imprisonment for the defendant’s plea of guilty. 17.On the 4th charge and the 5th charge, I will take a starting point again of 30 months’ imprisonment on each charge and reduce that to 20 months’ imprisonment for the defendant’s plea of guilty. 18.I shall take as an overall starting point for these sets of offences, a starting point of 45 months’ imprisonment which would lead to sentence after deduction for his plea of guilty of 30 months’ imprisonment. I shall achieve that by making the following order:-
|