HKSAR v. Jaspal Singh
Read the full judgment text of HCMA 100/2006 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 8 March 2006.
1. The appellant pleaded guilty to three offences: Breach of Condition of Stay, Using an Identity Card relating to another person and Theft. He was sentenced to 15 months imprisonment on the charge of using an identity card relating to another person, and 2 months each on the remaining 2 charges, the sentences were to run concurrently.
|
HCMA 100/2006 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. HCMA 100 OF 2006 (ON APPEAL FROM ESCC 5195 OF 2005) ______________________ BETWEEN
____________ Before : Deputy High Court Judge Leong in Court Date of Hearing : 8 March 2006 Date of Judgment : 8 March 2006 ______________________ J U D G M E N T ______________________ 1.The appellant pleaded guilty to three offences: Breach of Condition of Stay, Using an Identity Card relating to another person and Theft. He was sentenced to 15 months imprisonment on the charge of using an identity card relating to another person, and 2 months each on the remaining 2 charges, the sentences were to run concurrently. 2.The facts as submitted by the appellant are these. On 29 November 2005, the appellant was found by police in the street in a furtive manner. On checking his identity card, the appellant said he lost his identity card and produced a security permit with his photograph on it. Further investigation by the police at the police station revealed that the security permit belonged to another person who had lost it on a bus. The Immigration Department confirmed that the appellant arrived on 25 November 2004 and was permitted to stay for 14 days only. The appellant overstayed until 29 November 2005. The appellant appeals against sentence. 3.In his letter to the court, he said he accepted responsibility for what he did in Hong Kong, and that his family at home was very worried about him. He asked for leniency. And in court before me, he made the same plea. 4.The sentences imposed by the magistrate are in all respect proper and non-excessive. I see no reason to vary the sentences. The appeal is dismissed.
Mr Steward Hau, SGC of the Department of Justice, for the Respondent Appellant, in person |