The State v Bill Baru

• Jurisdiction: Papua New Guinea
• Judge: Batari AJ
• Judgment Date: 06 March 1997
• Citation: (1997) N1546
• Court: National Court
• Year: 1997
• Judgement Number: N1546

National Court: Batari AJ

Judgment Delivered: 6 March 1997

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

[NATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]

CR NO. 732 OF 1997

THE STATE

v

BILL BARU

Waigani

Batari AJ

6 March 1997

CRIMINAL LAW — Sentence — Stealing — Breach of Trust — Salesman falsely pretended to sell vehicles to victims and retained value of deposits — K9,790.00.

CRIMINAL LAW — Sentence — Plea — Delayed plea of Guilty — Observations on — Mitigating factors — Aggravating factors — Considerations of.

CRIMINAL LAW — Sentence — Effect of sentence on health of accused — Accused to show cause why imprisonment is not justified — Onus not discharged.

No Cases Cited.

Sentence

On a plea of guilty to three counts of stealing, total amount of K9,790.00 the following judgment was delivered on sentence.

Counsel:

L Maru for the State

M Apie'e for the Accused

6 March 1997

BATARI AJ: The prisoner Bill Baru has pleaded guilty to stealing a total of K9,790.00 charged on three different counts upon his indictment.

FACTS

The facts which formed the basis of the charges were that, between August and November, 1995 the prisoner worked as a Sales Representative with Meridian Motors Pty Ltd. On 11 of August, the first victim Tamalai Uroki requested from him a quotation to support his application to the Rural Development Bank for a loan to purchase a maxi loader truck from Meridian Motors Pty Ltd. The prisoner prepared the quotation and advised his customer to make down payment for the vehicle. Tamalai Uroki paid him K3,060.00 in cash. He assured the customer, he would take the quotation to the Rural Development Bank and negotiate the loan on his behalf. This did not eventuate. The prisoner retained the money and used it for his own benefit. On the second count which involved the sum of K3,430.00 the the prisoner obtained that amount from the victim customer under similar circumstances as the first count. This time however, the accused told the victim to pay K400.00 but he instead received deposit payment of K450.00 from te victim customer. Upon his follow-up, the victim was told the first quotation was invalid and that he was to make further down payment of K3,000.00 on a revised price. The victim paid that amount but waited in vain for his loan or vehicle because the prisoner did not account for the money as promised. The offence was committed between 1st and 8 November, 1995. On the third count, the victim customer paid K3,300.00 from a Rural Development Bank loan, to the prisoner as purchase price for a maxi loader truck sold by Meridian Motors Pty Ltd. The prisoner failed to deliver the vehicle. He also failed to pay the money into the company account and had since failed to account for that money.

THE OFFENCE

The offence with...