HKSAR v. ARIF AQIB

HCCC 402/2023

[2025] HKCFI 4076

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 402 OF 2023

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

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

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

Transcript of the Audio Recording
of the Sentence in the above Case

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

COURT: Both defendants were jointly charged with one count of murder and two counts of wounding with intent. In respect of the allegations of the prosecution, it was alleged that in the evening on the 13th day of November 2017, at about 11 pm, a group of attackers of five to seven persons, armed with knives and iron bars, attacked a total of six Pakistani males who were having a social gathering at the pavilion in the Ngau Tau Kok Park on Ngau Tau Kok Road.

Both defendants pleaded not guilty to all the charges. After trial, each of them was convicted by the jury of wounding without intent, contrary to section 19 of the Offences Against the Persons Ordinance, Chapter 212, on all three counts.

On the verdict of the jury, it would appear that they were satisfied that at the time of the incident, even though both defendants were part of the joint enterprise of this attack, they did not realise that a weapon would be used in the course of the attack. To that regard I have to pay respect to the jury’s verdict, and I do bear this matter in mind when I consider the sentence to be imposed on the defendants.

The 1st defendant is now 30 years of age. He was aged 22 at the time of the offences. He has received Form 2 education and worked as a bar bender at the material time. He is a Pakistani male. He was arrested on 10 December 2017 in respect of this matter, and he has been detained for this matter for over seven and a half years.

He has a total of eight criminal convictions, two of which are related to offences of violence. In September 2010, he was convicted of the offence of assault occasioning actual bodily harm and was sentenced to 18 months’ probation order. In October 2015, he was convicted of the offence of robbery and was sentenced to the training centre. I note that when he was convicted of those offences, he was aged 15 and 20 respectively.

In respect of the 2nd defendant, he is also a Pakistani male, and he has a clear record. He is now 24 years old. At the time of the offence he was 17 years old. He was a Form 3 student then. He was arrested in respect of this case on 12 January 2018, and again he has been detained for over seven and a half years.

The maximum sentence for wounding under section 19 of the Offences Against the Persons Ordinance is 3 years’ imprisonment. All three offences arose from the same factual matrix, and it would be appropriate for me to take an overall view of the matter in consideration of the appropriate sentence. I think it is more appropriate for me to adopt the approach of imposing a global sentence for all three offences and then impose the same sentence in respect of each count, and order all of them to be served concurrently.

I have taken into account the gravity of the offences. This is a brutal, unprovoked and premeditated attack on a group of males who were only enjoying their drinks or chit-chatting at the pavilion, and they were totally unarmed. Bearing in mind the background and the facts of the case, the number of persons being attacked, the result that one of them was killed and two others were injured - even though the injuries and the consequences were not intended by these two defendants as one could see from the jury’s verdict. In any event, they did take part in a joint enterprise involving the attack by a group of persons on another group of persons. This is an unprovoked attack that occurred in a public place, in a park, at night time.

Having considered the seriousness of the offences, I consider that the facts of this case justify the imposition of the maximum sentence. So, taking a global view of the matter, the overall sentence for all three counts in respect of the 1st defendant should be 3 years’ imprisonment, and that 3 years’ imprisonment is also the sentence I impose on each of Counts 1, 2 and 3, all of them to be served concurrently.

In respect of the 2nd defendant, I am also of the view that he had the same culpability as the 1st defendant. So the overall sentence to be imposed for the 2nd defendant in respect of all three offences is also one of 3 years’ imprisonment. I will also impose an individual sentence of 3 years for each of Counts 1, 2 and 3, and order all the three counts to be served concurrently.

Therefore, the overall sentence for each of the 1st and the 2nd defendant is 3 years’ imprisonment.