HKSAR v. SHEIKH ASRAF HOSSAIN

DCCC 746/2015

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO 746 OF 2015

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

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

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

Reasons for Sentence

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

1.  The defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of trafficking in a dangerous drug.

2.  On 2 June 2015, defendant came from India via Thailand to Hong Kong by flight.  At about 2255 hours, defendant was intercepted by a Custom officer at the Green Channel, Arrival Hall A of Hong Kong Airport.

3.  After checking the defendant’s baggage tag of his suitcase bearing his name, officer asked whether it belonged to him and defendant replied ‘yes’.  Upon further examination, officer found 12 bottles with marking of a dietary supplement inside the suitcase.  They were tin-foil sealed and upon opening the bottles, cannabis resin was found for a total of 9.4 kilogrammes in 12 bottles.  The estimated street value is $648,000.

4.  When asked about the nature of the substance, under caution, defendant said, “I don’t know”. However, defendant now in court admits possession of the said dangerous drug for the purpose of unlawful trafficking.

5.  Defendant is aged 27, Indian nationality and has no criminal record in Hong Kong.  Ms Tam submits that the defendant works as a mobile accessories salesman in India, earning equivalent of about HK$2,500 per month.  Defendant is married and his wife is going to give birth in November. 

6.  For the commission of the offence, it is submitted that the defendant is foolish enough to follow somebody’s instructions to take the drugs to Hong Kong. 

7.  Defendant is now very remorseful and pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity and hopes to be back to India as soon as possible as he is the sole breadwinner of the family and he hopes to take care of his wife and the coming new-born baby.

8.  Trafficking in a dangerous drug is a very serious offence.  In Attorney General v Tuen Shui-ming [1995] 2 HKCLR 129, the Court of Appeal has laid down the tariff for trafficking in cannabis resin, where for over 9 kilogrammes, 4 years and upwards’ imprisonment shall be imposed. 

9.  In the present case, it involved 9.4 kilogrammes of cannabis resin, which means more than 4 years’ imprisonment shall be imposed.  However, taking into account the facts of the case and all the mitigation submitted, particularly his guilty plea and family background, I shall still adopt the starting point of 4 years’ imprisonment, to be reduced to 32 months upon guilty plea. 

10.  Therefore the defendant is sentenced to 32 months’ imprisonment for this offence.