HKSAR v. GADARA JASPAL SINGH

DCCC 1008/2024

[2025] HKDC 1157

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1008 OF 2024

____________

____________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

The defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of "Burglary". He burgled an Indian restaurant situated at Shop No.5, Ground Floor, Fuk Tak Building, Nos.234-242 Castle Peak Road, Yuen Long ("the Restaurant").

Summary of Facts

2.  Mr. Ali (PW1) was the owner of the Restaurant.  In November 2023, the lock of the back sliding door of the Restaurant was broken.  PW1 would use 2 barbecue hooks to secure that sliding door every day after work.

3.  Upon arriving at work around 11:00 a.m. on 8 January 2024, PW1 found the back sliding door having been left ajar and the 2 barbecue hooks lying on the floor.  There were signs of ransacking in the Restaurant.  The following properties were found missing:  (i) $11,000 cash placed in the cash till; (ii) the CCTV hard disk located near the cash till; (iii) 2 mobile phones placed under the cash till; and (iv) a mobile phone placed on top of a refrigerator in the kitchen.

4.  CCTV footage of nearby locations captured the defendant approaching the back sliding door of the Restaurant around 3:50 a.m. on 8 January 2024.  He used a refrigerator to block the CCTV camera.  The defendant's fingerprint was found on the cash till of the Restaurant.

5.  On 26 January 2024, PC 13940 arrested the defendant.  Under caution, he admitted in Punti having committed the burglary in the present case.  He had spent all the stolen cash and sold the mobile phones to other people.  In his video recorded interview, the defendant claimed that he was drunk at the time and randomly broke into the Restaurant alone.  Since the sliding door was unlocked, he pulled it open forcefully.  The defendant admitted having sold the CCTV hard disk in Kowloon.  He claimed that he has sold the stolen items for a few hundred dollars.

Mitigation & Sentence

6.  The defendant is 40 and has 9 conviction records, which included 8 "Burglary" offences and 3 "Theft" offences. Defence counsel Mr. Marray informed me that the defendant came to Hong Kong from India in 1996 and became a permanent resident.  He is single and has a long-term girlfriend, who was a domestic helper in Hong Kong.  They have a daughter (aged 13).  The defendant's girlfriend and daughter reside in the Philippines.

7. In mitigation, Mr. Marray submitted that the root of the defendant's problems is his drug habit. He is determined to quit drugs and has plans to go back to India after serving his sentence. He intends to bring his girlfriend and daughter to India as well. He will start afresh working at his family farm in Punjab and living a simple life. His family (including his mother and brother) will help him stay away from drugs and alcohol.

8. The normal starting point for non-domestic burglary is 2.5 years' imprisonment. The defendant is a repeated offender of theft-related offences. He also re-offended in just 2 months after being released from prison. All of the above are aggravating factors. I would increase the starting point to 33 months. With the timely guilty plea, I sentence the defendant to 22 months' imprisonment.

Overall sentence

9. Moments ago, I have just sentenced the defendant to a total prison term of 28 months in DCCC 688/2024. He committed the present "Burglary" offence before he committed the 2 offences in DCCC 688/2024. Both cases (3 offences in total) took place within 3 days and their nature is similar. I consider the defendant a serial burglar. Notwithstanding the totality principle, I order 16 months in the present case to run consecutive to the sentences in DCCC 688/2024. In other words, the total prison term for both cases is 44 months[1].