2 C.L.R1987December17 [A.LOIZOU,DEMETRIADES,PIKIS,JJ.] BfLALALIAHMEDANDANOTHER, Appellant, v. THEREPUBLIC, Respondents. (CriminalAppeals Nos. 4917, 4918). 5 10 Sentence —Shop-breakingandstealing, contraryto section294(a)ofCriminal Code, Cap. 154 — Stolen property valued at £11,000 recovered — Appellant, analien, 19years'oldon ashortvisittoCyprus prayedforleniency onaccountofhisfamilycircumstancesandfinancialcondition—Threeyears' imprisonment—Not manifestlyexcessive—Observationsastowhatshould betheattitudeoftheCourtsinrelation tooffencesofthisnature. The appellant,an alien 19years'old,whocame forashortvisittoCyprus pleaded guilty to a count for the aforesaid offence. The value of the goods stolen from the shop in question was £11,000.- The stolen property was finally recovered. This appeal is directed against the aforesaid sentence. The appellant prayed forleniency on account of hisfamily circumstancesand inparticular the financial condition ofhistwoyoungerminorbrothersandhisoldmother ofwhichhe istheironlysupporter. 15 Held, dismissing the appeal: The sentence imposed is not manifestly excessive. The Courts should consider such offences as being very serious indeed asof theirnature and inparticulartheir commissionbypersons who arriveforashortstayanddepartassoonastheyachievetheircriminaltargets, itisalmostimpossibleforthePolicetodetectandrecoverthestolenproperty. 20 Appealsdismissed. Appeals against sentence. Appealsagainstsentence byBilalAliAhmed andAnother who were convicted on the 6th October, 1987 at the Assize Courtof Lamaca (Criminal Case No. 8166/87) on two counts of the 25 offence ofshopbreakingandstealingcontrarytosection294(a)of the Criminal Code, Cap. 154 and were sentenced by Nikitas, 215 Ahmed v. Republic
(1987)P.D.C., Laoutas, S.D.J, and G. Nicolaou, D.J. to three years' imprisonment each on the first count and accused 1was further sentenced to one year's imprisonment on count 2 to run concurrently. Appellantappeared inperson. A. M. Angelides, Senior Counsel of the Republic, for the respondent. A. LOIZOU J. gave the following judgment of the Court. The appellant who is nineteen years of age comes from Iraq. He arrived at Lamaca Airport together with his brother Jelal Ali 10 Ahmed Khalilonthe5thAugust 1987andstayedinTsokosHotel Apartments,intendingtoleaveCyprusonthe 14thofthatmonth. On the night of the 6th August at about 10:30 p.m. the complainant, whoisagold-smith and hasashopinZenon Kitieos Street at Lamaca, having closed earlier that evening his shop, 15 went back in order to switch off the lights of the shop after collecting allthejewlleryand otherpreciousmerchandise that he wasexhibitingtherein andstoringthem inaspecialsafe.Theshop in question has two entrances. The one on Zenon Kitieos Street, and the other at the rear which opens into a car-park. This rear 20 door isof the ordinary type made of aluminium frame and glasspane, and was locked with the usual lock. Inside this door however,there wasan irondoorwhichwasclosedandsecured by means of two padlocks. When the complainant arrived there he noticed that the lightsof the shophad been switched off, the rear 25 doors of theshop had been broken intoand most ofthejewellery exhibitedinhisshopstolen.Amongtheitemsstolentherewasalso a diver'swristwatch of «Casio»make. The casewasreported tothePoliceand asaresultofitsprompt action and the cooperation of ordinary citizens, the case was 30 detected and allstolen itemsrecovered.Whathadhappened was thatprosecution witness A.Perdikisnoticed inthegarden of his shopinValdaseridesstreetasackhiddeninabush.ThePolicewas called and it was ascertained that the sack contained a pair of gloves and shop-breaking tools, i.e. a lever, a screw-driver and 35 two cutters ultimately identified as those used by the culprits for breakingintotheshop ofthecomplainant.ThePolicelocated the shop which sold these toolsand obtained useful information. On the 13th August a police patrol in the area where the sack had 216 5 2 C.L.R. Ahmedv.Republic A.Lolzou J. been found saw the appellant and hisbrother. The appellant had on his wrist a «Casio» watch, whilst his brother Jelal Ali had a recent wound on hishand. Itmaybe noted here that atthe scene of the crimeby the rear door there were blood stains.The Police 5 patrol linked the wound on that man's hand to the blood stains found atthe scene. Upon asearch being carried out later that day, on the strength of ajudicialwarrant, oftheapartment wheretheappellant andhis brother were staying, the Police found a great part of the stolen 10 items packed in several bags. Ultimately, the appellant and his brother confessed tothecrimeand disclosed tothePolicethatthe restofthestolenarticleshadbeen hidden inthetankofakerosene stove. Both were prosecuted before the Lamaca Assize Court and 15 both pleaded guilty to a count of shop-breaking and stealing, contrary to section 294(a) of the Criminal Code, Cap. 154. The itemsstolenasdescribedinascheduleattached tothe Information were sixty-two pieces ofjewellery, three lighters of Win Bugattin make and one «Casio»wrist watch. They were of a total valueof 20 eleven-thousand pounds. JelalAlialsopleaded guiltytoasecond countof shop-breaking and stealing from another shop the sum of £40 and a box containing one vase and sixglasses of a total value of six pounds and ninety-five cents. 25 The appellant and his brother were sentenced to three years' imprisonment on the first count each and Jelal Ali to one year's imprisonment on the second count, sentences to run concurrently. Asagainstthesesentences,both accusedappealed tothisCourt 30 but the appeal of Jelal Ali was dismissed as abandoned as in the meantime he had been released from prison on health grounds and did notappear before us. Theappellantwhoappeared inperson andwhodidnotwishto have an advocate appointed bytheCourt torepresent him,inhis 35 addressinmitigation,prayedforleniencyandurgedthattherewas room for the sentence to be reduced further on account of his familycircumstancesandinparticularthefinancial conditionofhis twoyoungerminorbrothersandhisoldmotherofwhichheistheir only supporter. 217 A.Lolzou J.
(1987)Ahmed v. Republic Needless to say that these facts were already before theAssize Courtand weredulytaken intoconsideration byit. The Assize Court in passing sentence, after dealing with the personalcircumstancesofeachoffender inadditiontothedetailed description of the circumstances relatingtotheoffence, observed that offences of this nature by foreigners occur with a disturbing frequency and take great dimensions ina degree that they create a feeling of insecurity to the citizens. We endorse fully these observations of theAssize Court. 5 Having given our best consideration to the totality of the 10 circumstances and bearing in mind the principles governing the functionsofthisCourtonappealinmattersofsentencing,wehave cometotheconclusionthatthisappealshouldbedismissedasthe sentenceimposed isnotmanifestlyexcessive.Wemayaswelltake this opportunity to stress that the Courts should consider such 15 offences as being very serious indeed as of their nature and in particulartheircommission bypersons whoarrive fora short stay and depart as soon as they achieve their criminal targets, thus making it almost impossible for the Police to detect and recover thestolen property. 20 In conclusion we would like to pay tribute to the Prosecution Witness A. Perdikis for the public spiritexhibited byhim and the quick action and vigilance of members of the Police involved in the detection of this crime that resulted in the conviction and punishment of the offenders as well as therecovery of thestolen 25 property. Foralltheabove reasons theappeals are dismissed. Appeals dismissed. 218