Criminal appeal dismissed; sentence for assault not manifestly excessive despite complainants' alleged fault.
Cipro (CY)
Sintesi Legislator
Generato dall'IAThe Court dismissed the appellant's appeal against a £10 fine and £30 binding over order for assault causing actual bodily harm. The appellant argued the complainants, who allegedly started the fight, should have received harsher penalties, yet the trial judge imposed identical sentences on all parties. The court held that the trial judge properly considered all factors and that the sentence was not manifestly excessive, making the complainants' alleged fault an insufficient ground for reduction.
Regesto Legislator
Generato dall'IASection 243 of the Criminal Code Cap. 154; A sentence is not manifestly excessive merely because the complainants in a mutual fight were to blame, and non-punishment of the other parties is not a sufficient reason for reducing the appellant's sentence.
Parole chiave
Generato dall'IADisposizioni normative citate
Generato dall'IADecisioni correlate
Generato dall'IATesto completo
[*548] 1971 November 23
(TRIANTAFYLLIDES, P., STAVRINIDES, HADJIANASTASSIOU, JJ.)
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Antigoni Keleshi,
Appellant,
v.
The Police,
Respondents.
(Criminal Appeal No. 3289).
Criminal Law - Sentence - Appeal against sentence of fine and binding over for assault causing actual bodily
harm - Section 243 of the Criminal Code Cap. 154 - All proper considerations taken into account in assessing sentence
- Non punishing, in other proceedings, more severely the complainants, who allegedly were to blame for the fight, not a sufficient reason for reducing the sentence - Sentence not manifestly excessive - Appeal dismissed.
G. Platritis, for the Appellant.
K. Talarides, Senior Counsel of the Republic, for the Respondents
JUDGMENT
The judgment of the Court was delivered by:-
TRIANTAFYLLIDES. P.: In this case the [*549] appellant appeals against the sentence of £10 fine, which was imposed on her in
respect of the offence of assault causing actual bodily harm, contrary to section 243 of the Criminal Code, Cap. 154, and the sentence of being bound over in the sum of £30 for one year to keep the peace and be of good behaviour, which was imposed on her in respect of a similar offence committed against another complainant. Both offences, to which the appellant pleaded guilty, were committed when the appellant was involved in a fight with the two complainants, during which she caused them certain injuries which, fortunately, were not of a serious nature.
The main submission of counsel for the appellant is that on the two complainants, who were tried separately by the same District Judge immediately after the aforesaid sentences were imposed on the appellant, there were passed the same sentences as on the appellant, though, according to counsel's contention, the complainants, and not the appellant, were to blame for the fight.
From the record before us - and we cannot take into account the record of the other proceedings - it is clear that the trial Court took into account all proper considerations in assessing the punishment imposed on the appellant; and such punishment, for this kind of offences, cannot be said to be manifestly excessive in the circumstances.
Whether or not he ought to have punished more severely the complainants is not a sufficient reason for reducing the sentences complained of in this appeal, which is, accordingly, dismissed.
Appeal dismissed.