1965 [ΖΓ;ΚΙΛ, P., TRIANTAFYLLIDES A N D JOSEPHIDES, JJ.J Murt-h 1*J T H E ATTORNEYCtKNEIUI, ΟΓ T H E Ri:r:i;i.i<: ΓΗΕ ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF T H E REPUBLIC, Appellant, v. PHEDIAS T H E O F A N O U S , j'. Respondent. PHKIJIAS ΎΗΚΟΓΑΝΟΓΡ {Criminal Appeal No. 2757) Customs Management Law Cap. 315—Possessing privileged goods contrary to sections 209 and 201 thereof {as amended)—In sufficiency of sentence imposed by trial Court—Sentence in creased on appeal. Sentence—Defrauding Revenue—Trial Courts may impose im prisonment even in cases of first offenders. The respondent was charged with possessing privileged goods without being an entitled person contrary to sections 209 and 201 of the Customs Management Law, Cap. 315, as amended by sections 14
(2)(ξ) and II (σ) of Law 26/61. The said goods were 299 packets of 20 cigarettes each marked " NAAFI Stores" on which the import duty amounted to £55.230 mils. On his own plea he was con victed and sentenced to pay a tine of £20 and the goods des cribed in the charge were forfeited to the Republic. On appeal by the Attorney-General against the inadequacy of sentence on the ground that the sentence of the trial Court was manifestly insufficient viewing the seriousness and pre valence of I he offence the Supreme Court in allowing the appeal-Held, (!) there is no doubt that defrauding the revenue is a serious offence and trial Courts may even in cases of first offenders impose- imprisonment.
(2)Bearing in mind that the respondent is not a itchman. rather a poor man. with children, and having a brother inthe services, arid thai hesupports his family as well, we arecontent with increasing '.he line from £20 to £50. Appeal allowed. Sentence of Court below set aside. /Veir sentence entered as aforesaid. .?•*> 196Ϊ M i r t h 19 Appeal against sentence. Appeal by the Attorney-General of the Republic against the inadequacy oi the sentence imposed on the respondent who was convicted on the 12m February, 1965 at the District Court of Nicosia (Criminal Case No 673/65) on one count of the offence of possessing privileged goods without being an entitled person, contrary to sections 209 and 201 of the Customs Management Law Cap 315, as amended by sections 14
(2)(ξ) and 11 (σ) of Law 26/61 and was sentenced by D e m e t n o u D.J. to pay a fine of £ 2 0 and the goods described in the charge were ordered to be forfeited to the Republic A Frangos, counsel of the Republic, for the appellant. C. J Myrianthis, for the respondent. The j u d g m e n t of the Covin was delnered by . ΖΕΚΙΛ, Ρ : We ha\e considered this case T h e r e is no doubt that defrauding the revenue is a serious offence Even in cases of first offenders, a trial Court, in certain cases may νery properly impose a sentence of imprisonment In the circumstances oi your case, bearing in mind that you are not a rich man, rather a poor man, with children, and having a brother in the Services, and that vou support his family as well, we are content with increasing the fine from £20 to £ 5 0 ; and we g n e you the chance to pav it within two months and if you fail to pay vou will go to prison for two months instead Appeal allowed Sentence of Court belotv set aside 'Veto sentence to be entered as afoiesaid 11 I'm ΛΤΤΟΗΜΪ C^M-HAI 01 1Ht i>HtDu-, rm-oFA\ot -.