HKSAR v. Chand Gill

Read the full judgment text of HCCC 20/2014 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 17 June 2014.

Cited by 1 case

Case No.HCCC 20/2014
Court
High Court CFI
Date17 Jun 2014
Judge
Case Document
100%Judiciary

HCCC 20/2014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 20 OF 2014

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

  HKSAR  
  v  
  CHAND GILL  

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

Before: Hon Line J
Date: 17 June 2014 at 4.09 pm
Present: Mr Paul C L Leung, on fiat, for HKSAR
  Mr Kamlesh A Sadhwani, instructed by George Chan & Co, assigned by Director of Legal Aid, for the accused
Offence: (1), (2) and (4) Rape(強姦)
  (3) Non-consensual buggery (未經同意下作出肛交)

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

Transcript of the Audio Recording
of the Sentence in the above Case

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

COURT: The jury has convicted you of one count of rape and one count of non-consensual buggery. They acquitted you of two counts of rape. Your

victim was an Indonesian maid. It was two years since she had seen her family. You offered her friendship but, behind that friendship, or offer of it, was to be perceived a desire for more.

I bear in mind the jury have acquitted you of the first two allegations of rape but the conviction on Count 4 demonstrates that, at that time, you either knew she was not consenting or you were reckless as to it. The fact that you might not have acted as you did but for some drink taken provides you with little or no mitigation.

Sentences in the region of 6 years are to be expected in this jurisdiction following conviction on a single count of rape and that is the starting point I shall take.

This case was aggravated by the fact that you deliberately buggered her. It is also exacerbated by the fact that the sexual intercourse and the buggery, in both cases, no condom was used.

Bearing in mind those aggravations, I shall increase the sentence to one of 7½ years. That is the sentence I shall pass on each of the counts, Counts 3 and 4, concurrently.

Cited by 1 case

Other judgments that cite this case