HKSAR v. JUNAID AHMED AND OTHERS

DCCC 523/2013

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 523 OF 2013

----------------------

----------------------

---------------------

Reasons for Sentence

---------------------

1. Junaid Ahmed, Surjeet Singh, Lovepreet Singh, Malkiat Singh, Harpinder Singh, you have been convicted by me after trial of the offence of attempted robbery.

2. The attempted victim of your robbery was Mr Fung Shing, the proprietor of a scrap metal recycling business in Yuen Long.  He lived in Tung On Street in Yau Ma Tei and habitually carried large sums of money, usually in the region of 150,000 to 200,000 dollars for use in his business, but on the morning in question, $541,000.

3. Clearly the fact that he carried large sums of money must have become known to you, together with the fact that he usually left his home in Tung On Street to drive to work at sometime between 7.10 and 7.30 each morning.

4. I was satisfied that the five of you and two other South Asian males hatched a plan to rob Mr Fung of the money he would be carrying on the morning of 15 March this year.  You arrived at the scene about 40 minutes before Mr Fung left home.  It is obvious from your actions that you knew he would leave his home by means of a side alley which led into Tung On Street and then walk to his vehicle which was parked further up Tung On Street. You therefore laid in wait for him.

5. You, Junaid Ahmed, and you, Lovepreet Singh, waited with a third man at the mouth of the alleyway on one side of Tung On Street.  You, Surjeet Singh, waited on the other side of the street with an accomplice.  You, Malkiat Singh, and you, Harpinder Singh, positioned yourself at the junction of Tung On Street and Pitt Street.  As Tung On Street was a one-way street, you would therefore be in a position to warn your accomplices of the approach of anyone who might interfere with your plans.

6. When Mr Fung left home at about 7.20 that morning he was carrying the bag containing $541,000 in cash.  The strap of the bag was over his shoulder and across his body.  He turned into Tung On Street where upon you, Junaid Ahmed, 1st defendant, and you, Lovepreet Singh, the 3rd defendant, and a third man followed him down the street.  You, Surjeet Singh, and another accomplice followed him in parallel on the opposite pavement.

7. Mr Fung crossed the road and opened the door of his vehicle and put the bag with the money onto the driver seat.  At that moment, the man with you, Surjeet Singh, came round the front of the vehicle and stood behind Mr Fung and raised his hand while you, Surjeet Singh, were in the process of following him round the vehicle.  You, Junaid Ahmed, and you, Lovepreet Singh, were in the process of crossing the road.

8. The police had obviously been made aware of your plans.  Some officers were keeping observation and others were laying an ambush.  It was at this point that the police operation became overt. 

9. You, Junaid Ahmed, Surjeet Singh and Lovepreet Singh, were arrested at or near the scene.  Your two companions managed to escape.  You, Malkiat Singh, and you, Harpinder Singh, were arrested at a McDonald’s Restaurant some distance away.  You had walked there as soon as you realized the police presence at the scene.  Fortunately, because of the intervention of the police, your plan was thwarted.

10. No force had yet been inflicted on Mr Fung Shing though I am in no doubt that that would have been the case if things had proceeded according to your plan.

11. Insofar as you five are concerned, none of you carried any weapons.  Your two accomplices were holding bottles and it may be they would have been used if necessary, but I am prepared to accept that this was a robbery that you sought to carry out by reason of the strength of your numbers rather by the use or display of weapons.

12. Four years’ imprisonment is normally the upper end of the scale for those who carried out unarmed robberies.  This was not a normal unarmed robbery.  It was a carefully planned operation involving the seven of you with the intention of gaining a very substantial sum of money. 

13. I bear in mind that, no thanks to you but thanks to the intervention of the police, none of the money carried by Mr Fung was lost, nor was any violence inflicted. 

14. I have listened to all that your counsel have said on your behalves.  I am satisfied that in the circumstances of this case, a starting point of 5 years’ imprisonment is appropriate in respect of each one of you. 

15. The role of you, Malkait Singh, and you, Harpinder Singh, was just as important to the success of this enterprise as your accomplices who would forcibly seize the money from Mr Fung.  Although you, Surjeet Singh, were younger than your co-defendants, you were an adult and would have been fully aware of the gravity of what you were doing that day. 

16. None of you have shown a trace of remorse for what you have done and are therefore not entitled to any discount on that account. 

17. You, Junaid Ahmed, have been before the courts on four previous occasions and have already served a sentence of imprisonment for the offence of robbery. 

18. The remaining defendants are of previous good character.  I wish to make it clear again to you, Harpinder Singh, that although through a slip I omitted to mention when delivering my reasons for verdict, it was a factor I had in mind in considering the case against you.

19. I am prepared in the case of you, Surjeet Singh, you, Lovepreet Singh, you, Malkiat Singh, and you, Harpinder Singh, to recognize your previous good character by giving you a discount of 6 months from the 5-year starting point on the robbery charge.

20. I see no reason to give any discount to you, Junaid Ahmed.

21. The sentences therefore on the attempted robbery charge are therefore, 1st defendant, 5 years; 2nd defendant, 4½ years; 3rd defendant, 4½ years; 4th defendant, 4½ years; and 5th defendant, 4½ years. 

22. You, Surjeet Singh, pleaded guilty to the 2nd charge against you at the start of this trial, namely possessing a false instrument, contrary to section 75(1) of the Crimes Ordinance.  The instrument in question was a false Form 8 recognizance form. 

23. At the time of your arrest you were in possession of that form which was in the name of Major Singh.  For some time until the police realized that that was not your real name, you pretended you were Major Singh.  It does appear that even though you were carrying this false recognizance form, you had a valid recognizance form in your own name at the place at which you were living.  It may well be therefore that your possession of the false recognizance form had some connection with the fact that you intended to commit the offence of robbery.

24. I accordingly adopt a starting point of 9 months’ imprisonment for that offence which I discount by one-third to reflect your plea of guilty and that 6 months’ sentence will run concurrently with the sentence that I have passed on you on the charge of attempted robbery.

25. Those are the sentences I pass.