HKSAR v. Kaur Manpreet Preety

Case No.DCCC 9/2013
Court
District Court
Date23 May 2013
Judge
Case Document
100%

DCCC 9/2013

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 9 OF 2013

____________

  HKSAR  
  v  
  KAUR Manpreet Preety  
____________
Before: H.H. Judge G. Lam
Date: 23 May 2013
Present: Mr. Patrick Loftus, counsel on fiat, for HKSAR.
  Mr. J.N. Karbhari of M/s Jal N. Karbhari & Co., for the defendant.
Offence: Wounding with intent(意圖傷人)

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

The defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of "Wounding with intent". She used a foldable knife to stab the victim's forearm.

Summary of Facts

2.Sana-Bibi (PW1) and the defendant met in April 2012.  They became casual friends.

3.On 7 September, PW1 and her schoolmate Areej Kianat had some disputes; there were some struggling and pushing.  The matter was mediated by Areej's elder sister.

4.About 6:50 pm on 21 September, PW1 was on her way home.  The defendant appeared at the Ground Floor of Ngai Yuen House, Chuk Yuen South Estate (the building of PW1's home) and asked PW1 why she hit Areej.  PW1 denied.  The defendant punched PW1's face twice and slapped her 3 times.  The defendant also used her right hand to grab PW1's neck.  PW1 pushed her away.  The defendant then took out a foldable knife (12.5 cm long with a blade of 4.5 cm) to attack PW1.  PW1 raised her right arm to protect herself.  The defendant used the knife to stab PW1's right forearm 4 times.  PW1 shouted loudly for help.

5.Soon after PW1 was attacked, her mother came downstairs and caught the defendant.  PW1's father also came down after a while and called the Police.  PC 7654 later arrived and arrested the defendant.  Under caution, she said "She hit me, I hit her."

6.PW1 was treated at the hospital.  Upon admission, she was found to have abrasions and tenderness over her right ear.  There was a 2-cm laceration and tenderness on her right forearm.  The stab wound was sutured and she was discharged on the same day.

Mitigation & Sentence

7.The defendant is now 17 and has a clear record. At the time of the offence, she was a full-time student in a Business and Office Operations course. Due to her arrest, she did not complete the course.

8.Defence lawyer Mr. Karbhari submitted that the defendant comes from a single-parent family. She resides with her mother and 2 younger siblings (aged 13 and 10) who are still in school. The family depends on the defendant's limited income and social welfare. The defendant's mother suffers from various illnesses and has recently fractured her leg. The defendant needs to look after her mother and to supervise her siblings. A bundle of mitigation documents was placed before me; their contents are duly noted.

9.The defendant is only 17 and this is her first criminal offence. The comments in her RC/TC Suitability Report are fairly positive and detention in a Rehabilitation Centre is recommended. Mr. Karbhari has tried his best to persuade this court to consider a non-custodial sentence so that the defendant can return home to care for her mother and siblings.

10.I accept that this case might have arisen from some minor disputes between 2 teenagers and that the attack on PW1 might not have been pre-meditated. However, the defendant having carried with her a foldable knife (irrespective of her intention) does cause me some concern. I am aware of the size and multi-purpose nature of that knife; I simply do not see the need for her to carry it. In my view, a non-custodial sentence is out of the question.

11."Wounding with intent" is a serious offence. I understand that sentencing of these offences is case specific and there is no tariff as such; however, sentences in the range of 3 to 12 years' imprisonment are by no means uncommon.

12.On the other hand, I cannot overlook the defendant's age and her need for rehabilitation. I bear in mind that correctional institutions such as Rehabilitation Centres and Training Centres exist for the benefit of young offenders. These institutions play an important role in our penal system. Detention in a Rehabilitation Centre would enable the defendant to develop more insights into her problems. A period of disciplinary training coupled with a term of statutory supervision would be beneficial to her. She would also have the opportunity to study and/or to receive some vocational training. After careful consideration, I have decided to make a Rehabilitation Centre Order, which will be the sentence for the defendant.

13.Regarding the needs of the defendant's family members, I note from the report that they are receiving social welfare. I am sure they would and know how to approach the Social Welfare Department should the circumstances require.

  (G. Lam)
  District Judge