The Queen v. Ahmed Parves

HCMA000181/1991

-----------------

HEADNOTE

-----------------

SENTENCE - POSSESSION OF FORGED PASSPORT - USE ON SINGLE OCCASION - PROPER SENTENCE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 181 OF 1991

--------------------

BETWEEN

-------------------

Coram: Hon. Bewley J. in Court

Date of hearing: 7 May 1991

Date of delivery of judgment: 17 May 1991

----------------

JUDGMENT

-----------------

1. The appellant pleaded guilty to possession of a forged travel document contrary to section 42(2)(c)(i)  of the Immigration Ordinance and was sentenced to 18 months imprisonment.

2. He was in transit from Pakistan to USA when an Immigration officer at Kai Tak demanded proof of his identity. He produced a forged British passport, which he said he had obtained from a friend because he was unable to obtain a US visa with his Pakistani passport. He was searched and a valid Pakistani passport in his name was found. He is 22 years old and has no previous convictions.

3. The Court of Appeal has indicated in two fairly recent cases that 18 months imprisonment is appropriate for this offence. In R v. Wong Ju Wen [1989] 2 HKLR 26, the applicant was in possession of a genuine Malaysian passport in another person's name, which he had used on 16 occasions to enter or leave Hong Kong. He was also in possession of a Philippine passport in another's name, which he had used to enter Hong Kong. He had used them to facilitate his business travel commitments. His sentence was reduced from 24 months to 18 months.

4. In R v. Lie Kwet Tjoen CA 474 of 1989 an Indonesian passport holder in transit from China to Singapore was found to have in his luggage a forged Thai passport and four forged dies. The appellant's explanation was that he was trying to avoid payment of Indonesian departure tax. His sentence was reduced from three years to two years, of which six months was in respect of the forged die offences.

5. However both these cases were more serious than the present appeal. Each involved an element of repetition of the offences by businessmen travelling regularly in the area. This was a one-off infringement by a young man trying to get to USA. It thus falls into the least serious of the four categories adumbrated by me in R v. Bhagwant Singh-padda MA 1447 of 1988.

6. The appeal is allowed and the sentence reduced to nine months.

Representation:

Mr Patrick Li, Crown Counsel, for respondent.

Mr Dennis Law, assigned by D.L.A., for appellant.