The Queen v. Lee Chi Ching
|
1993, No. 333 HEADNOTE Relatively short custodial sentences - bail pending appeal. IN THE COURT OF APPEAL 1993, No. 333
BETWEEN
---------- Coram : Bokhary JA in Chambers Date of Hearing : October 12, 1993 Dates of Judgment : October 12, 1993 ---------------------- J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Bokhary JA: 1. This is an application for bail pending appeal. It arises within a small factual compass, but is not any the easier for that. My difficulty has been reduced, although not wholly removed, by the helpful submissions which I have received from Miss Moosdeen for the applicant and Miss Cross for the Crown. 2. On June 22 this year, the applicant, a man in his forties with roots and a family here and of previous good character subject to certain convictions for theft back in 1971 which resulted in binding over, was convicted in the District Court by Her Honour Judge Chua on one charge of fraudulently or recklessly inducing persons to invest money, contrary to section 3(1)(b) of the Protection of Investors Ordinance, Cap.335, and sentenced to 18 months’ imprisonment. 3. As to the strength of the appeal against conviction, no attempt has been made to demonstrate that it is highly likely to succeed. So nothing of that nature is available as a basis for granting bail pending appeal. And one is left to consider that course essentially on the basis of the period which will have elapsed by the time when the appeal comes on for hearing. Of course, even when the matter is approached essentially on that basis, the appeal’s chances of success still remain for consideration. For if the appeal were hopeless, an application for bail pending the same would, in truth, be tantamount to an abuse of process. And even where the appeal, although not hopeless, is very weak, the danger of the appellant absconding would, in the nature of things, normally fall to be considered very grave. In the present case, the appeal, while it does not appear to be highly likely to succeed, does appear to be at least reasonably arguable. I turn now to the question of time. 4. Having regard to what I have been told as to when the appeal is likely to come on for hearing, and having regard to how long the applicant will have by then spent in custody there is a very grave danger that, if bail pending appeal is refused, then the whole of his sentence will, taking into account full remission, have been served by the time when the appeal comes on for hearing let alone by the time when a decision is reached in the appeal. 5. That being so, it seems to me that, against the whole of the background and in all of the circumstances, this is a fit case in which to admit the applicant to bail; and I will admit him to bail pending appeal on these terms:-
6. On those conditions, I admit the applicant to bail pending appeal. 7. It seems to me that the time has come when, in addition to efforts to speed up the appellate process generally, urgent and serious consideration has to be given - and I hope that prompt action will follow such consideration - to creating a special list or arrangement for the early disposal of appeals involving relatively short custodial sentences. It is only to be expected that there will be cases, although the present case is not one, in which the background would cause the Court to shrink from granting bail pending appeal even though a very large part of the sentence, or even the whole of it, would have been served before the determination of the appeal if such bail is refused. That would of course give rise to an awkward and highly undesirable state of affairs. 8. Having said that, there is no more to be said now save to renew the thanks which I have expressed to counsel on both sides for their assistance this morning.
Miss M. Moosdeen (instructed by Messrs S.T. Poon & Co.) for the applicant Miss L.A. Cross (of the Attorney General's Chambers) for the Crown |