Hksar v Md Emran Hossain

Court:High Court (Hong Kong)
Judgement Number:HCMA66/2013
Judgment Date:06 Mar 2013
HCMA66/2013 HKSAR v. MD EMRAN HOSSAIN

HCMA 66/2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO 66 OF 2013

(ON APPEAL FROM KCCC 5073/2012)

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

BETWEEN

HKSAR Respondent

and

MD EMRAN HOSSAIN Appellant

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

Before: Hon M Poon J in Court
Date of Hearing: 1 March 2013
Date of Judgment: 1 March 2013
Date of Handing Down Reasons for Judgment: 6 March 2013

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

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

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

1. The appellant pleaded guilty to one charge of “Going Equipped for Stealing”, contrary to section 27(1) of the Theft Ordinance, Cap 210, Laws of Hong Kong and sentenced to a term of imprisonment for 8 months.

2. According to the facts to which he admitted, he was seen by a police officer carrying a plastic bag acting furtively. The police officer followed the appellant into an unguarded building and saw the appellant holding a crowbar on the first floor staircase, which was dropped at the sight of the policeman. Upon search of the appellant’s plastic bag, the policeman found one handheld electric drill and a pair of pliers.

3. Under caution, the defendant admitted that the tools belonged to him and that he was about to use them to take away the copper wire.

Ground of Appeal

4. The only grounds advanced by the appellant at the appeal hearing was that the Magistrate should have taken into account his detention, namely 54 days in 2006 and 51 days in 2012 and gave him further discount accordingly.

Respondent’s reply

5. Respondent’s counsel informed me that the appellant was administratively detained from 9 December 2006 to 25 January 2007 and between 25 May 2012 to 13 July 2012. It was submitted that only a period of detention in custody “relating to the offence for which the sentence of imprisonment was imposed” should have been given credit for. Since the appellant committed the present offence some four months after his release from administrative detention, he is not entitled to be given any discount accordingly.

6. Counsel also cited to cases (HKSAR v Lam Kin Hung, HCMA 75/2009 and HKSAR v Limbu Hukum Sing, HCMA 93/2008) to show that a starting point of 12 months for the offence of “Going Equipped for Stealing” have been upheld.

My Judgment

7. The...

To continue reading

Request your trial