HKSAR v. Syed Sajjad Ahmed

HCMA000934/1998

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

APPELLATE JURISDICTION

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 934 of 1998

(On Appeal from TWC 2232 of 1998)

______________

______________

Coram: Mr. Recorder L. Lok, S.C. in Court

Date of Hearing: 18 December 1998

Date of Judgment: 18 December 1998

_________________

J U D G E M E N T

_________________

1. The Appellant pleaded guilty to two charges. Charge 1: possession of an identity card relating to another person. He on 24th August 1998, at Ocean Crown Transportation Ltd. Lot no.71 Sai Cho Wan Road, Tsing Yi without lawful authority or reasonable excuse had in his possession an identity card bearing no. XE5615567 which related to Daswani Ramesh Ramchond. Charge 2 is a charge of breach of condition of stay. That he on 24th August overstayed when he was permitted to remain in Hong Kong only until 15th January 1998.

2. The facts which the appellant had admitted revealed the following events: On the day in question, a party of police officers went to a container site at Ocean Crown Transportation in Tsing Yi. There, the police found the Appellant, the Appellant was asked to provide proof of his identity. He produced a Hong Kong Identity Card in the name of Daswani Ramesh Ramchond. He then ran away, he was later apprehended. Upon further enquiry, it was discovered the identity card had been found to have been lost. The Appellant came to Hong Kong on the strength of a Pakistani passport. His permission to stay ended on 15th July 1998.

3. Under caution the Appellant admitted that he produced the identity card because he was afraid of being arrested by police, and he had therefore pretended to be the holder of the identity card. The learned magistrate considered the mitigation that had been advanced on behalf of the Appellant, he came to a view that there was a link between possession of the identity card and the Appellant's presence in Hong Kong.

4. In the accordance with the current tariff in relation to immigration offences, the learned magistrate was of the view that a sentence of 15 months after plea would have been appropriate. He kindly took into consideration his plea of guilty, clear record and the Appellant had decided to return to Pakistan as early as possible, the learned magistrate then gave him a reduction of 3 months. The sentence of 12 months in respect of the 1st charge and the sentence of 2 months in respect of 2nd charge were ordered to run concurrently. In my judgment, the sentence was not a day too long.

5. This morning the Defendant had produced a medical certificate setting out the heart condition of someone who he claims is his mother. I noted the day of the certificate that purportedly came from a clinic in New Wehli was dated 9th August 1998, the degree and extent of the heart condition had not been set out. The authenticity of this document can not be verified, I am, therefore, unable to use this additional material in the consideration of humanitarian ground.

6. The appeal is therefore dismissed.

Representation:

Mr. W. L. Cheung, SGC for Director of Public Prosecutions for the Respondent.

Appellant in person, present