Court dismisses appeals for excessive sentence where special permit conditions were strictly broken during close season.

[*1114] 1966 November 3

(TRIANTAFYLLIDES, STAVRINIDES, JJ., LOIZOU, AG. J.).

APPELLATE JURISDICTION

Archimides Andrea and Others,

Appellants,

v.

The Police,

Respondents.

(Criminal Appeals No.2838, 2839,

2840, 2841, 2842). (Consolidated).

Criminal Law - Sentence - Breaking the conditions of a special permit issued to appellants under section 6(1)(b) of the Game and Wild Birds Law, Cap.65 (as amended) – Appeal against sentence as being excessive - Sentence imposed not excessive so as to call for the intervention of the Court of Appeal.

Criminal Procedure - Appellant absent at hearing of appeal - Decision of Appellate Court under section 143(3) of the Criminal Procedure Law, Cap.155,to deal with the appeal, nevertheless.

Per Curiam: It must be borne in mind that a special permit, granted during a close season, is an exceptional relaxation of an otherwise generally applicable prohibition and, therefore, the terms and conditions of such permit have to be strictly abided by the sportsmen concerned. In times,· such as the present, of an urgent need of protecting game and wild birds in Cyprus, it is more than ever imperative that every possible care should be taken in order to ensure the due observance and enforcement of the relevant legislation and the courts should take a serious view of offences of the nature of the sub judice matter. So we are quite in agreement with the learned trial Judge in thinking that the sentence imposed on the appellants was in the circumstances, a lenient one.

G. Pelaghias, for Appellants in Appeals 2838,2840,2841 and 2842.

Appellant in Appeal 2839 absent.

K. Michaelides, on behalf of the Attorney-General, for the Respondents.

JUDGMENT

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by:-

TRIANTAFYLLIDES, J. : In these five appeals, which we have consolidated for the purposes of this hearing - inasmuch as they arise out of the same criminal case and the same facts - four of the appellants are represented by counsel hut the fifth has not appeared today; nevertheless, in the light of section 143(3) of the Criminal Procedure Law, Cap. 155, and in view of the circumstances of the matter, we have decided to proceed to deal with the appeal of the absent appellant together with the appeals of those represented by counsel.

The appellants having pleaded guilty to breaking the conditions of a special permit issued to them by the District Officer of Paphos, under section 6(1)(b) of the Game and Wild Birds Law, Cap. 65, (as amended by Laws 9/64 and 76/65) have been sentenced to a fine of £5 each, and they have also been prohibited from carrying a gun for a period of one year and any licence granted to them was ordered to be forfeited for the same period.

The appellants broke the conditions of their permit by pursuing game, during a close season, outside the area specified in such permit.

We have paid due regard to whatever learned counsel for appellants has submitted, but we cannot agree that the sentence imposed is excessive, so as to call for the intervention of this Court.

It must be borne in mind that a special permit, granted during a close season, is an exceptional relaxation of an otherwise generally applicable prohibition and, therefore, the terms and conditions of such permit have to be strictly abided by the sportsmen concerned. In times, such as the present, of an urgent need of protecting game and wild birds in Cyprus, it is more than ever imperative that every possible care should be taken in order to ensure the due [*1116] observance and enforcement of the relevant legislation and the courts should take a serious view of offences of the nature of the sub judice matter. So we are quite in agreement with the learned trial Judge in thinking that the sentence imposed on the appellants was, in the circumstances, a lenient one.

These appeals are dismissed accordingly.

Appeals dismissed.