HKSAR v. Shafique Mohammad

HCMA 418/2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 418 OF 2011

(ON APPEAL FROM STCC 1344 OF 2011)

____________

BETWEEN

____________

Before: The Honourable Mrs Justice V. Bokhary in Court

Date of Hearing: 14 July 2011

Date of Judgment: 14 July 2011

_______________

J U D G M E N T

_______________

1.The Appellant pleaded guilty in a Magistrates’ Court to two charges laid against him. One was of making a false representation to an Immigration Assistant and the other was of using an identity card relating to another person.

2.He admitted the fact set out in the brief facts produced by the prosecution which read as follows:-

“On 15 March 2011, the defendant presented for departure clearance at airport control point on strength of a Pakistani passport no. UC4118491 (hereinafter called as “P1”) in name of KHAN, ABDUL SHAKOOR with date of birth as 5 February 1973 and a Hong Kong identity card (HKIC) no. K289803(9) (hereinafter as “P2”) under the same identity. As the photos on P1 and P2 were found different from the defendant’s facial appearance. He was detained for further investigated.

2.   Under caution, the defendant admitted that he was a Pakistani known as MOHAMMAD SHAFIQUE with date of birth as 14 April 1964.  As he wanted to return to Pakistan, he asked a middleman to arrange a passport for him at a cost of HK$5,000.  Upon subsequent receipt of P1 and P2, he was aware that all the personal particulars recorded thereon did not relate to him and he did not know the rightful holder.  On 15 March 2011, armed with P1 and P2, he presented for departure clearance in Hong Kong upon which he falsely represented the bogus identity to an Immigration Assistant (subject matter of both charges).  The defendant was intercepted and arrested.”

3.The Appellant was sentenced to 15 months’ imprisonment.  That sentence is made up of concurrent terms of 12 months on the false representation charge and 15 months on the identity card relating to another person charge.  He now appeals against sentence.

4.I have listened with care everything that has been urged on me by the Appellant and I have also heard the submission by Ms Leung for the Respondent.

5.In my view, the total sentence of 15 months’ imprisonment cannot be regarded as too severe.  It is an appropriate sentence for the two offences to which the Appellant has pleaded guilty.  The appeal is therefore dismissed.

Appellant in person

Ms Peggy Leung, of the Department of Justice, for the Respondent