HK CourtDB
HomeDirectoryMCP
Hong Kong CourtDB
Back to directory
Magistracy Appeal2013

HKSAR v. MIRZA MUNAWAR LUQMAH

Related cases with same parties

  • CAAR11/1997HKSAR v. YIP CHI TUNG
  • CAAR1/1998HKSAR v. LING VERONICA
  • CAAR12/1996HKSAR v. WONG KWONG YICK
  • CAAR6/1998HKSAR v. LAU SHIU KONG AND ANOTHER
  • CAAR6/2012HKSAR v. LEUNG KWOK CHI
  • CAAR9/2001HKSAR v. WONG TO LEUNG
  • CACC100/1997HKSAR v. YU HON CHUN
  • CACC100/1999HKSAR v. LAM CHI KIN
  • CACC100/2000HKSAR v. SHING KUEN KIN
  • CACC100/2001HKSAR v. OU YANG MING CHYUAN
  • CACC100/2002HKSAR v. CHAN LAI SING AND ANOTHER
  • CACC100/2003HKSAR v. CHENG CHONG SHING
  • CACC100/2022HKSAR v. LIMBU PRASHANT
  • CACC101/1997HKSAR v. YIU KENNETH LIK KIN
  • CACC101/2001HKSAR v. LEUNG KWAI PING
  • CACC101/2021HKSAR v. WONG CHI FUNG AND ANOTHER
  • CACC10/1997HKSAR v. MAN KAM SHING
  • CACC10/1998HKSAR v. CHAN CHUN TAK
  • CACC10/2001HKSAR v. TAM KWAI KEUNG AND ANOTHER
  • CACC10/2002HKSAR v. WONG WAN SHAN
90721-EN-2013-12-17

HKSAR v. MIRZA MUNAWAR LUQMAH

HTML content

HCMA 605/2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO 605 OF 2013

(ON APPEAL FROM ESCC 2162 OF 2013)

____________

BETWEEN

 HKSARRespondent

and

 MIRZA MUNAWAR LUQMAHAppellant
____________
Before: The Honourable Mrs Justice V Bokhary in Court
Dates of Hearing: 17 December 2013
Date of Judgment: 17 December 2013

_________________

J U D G M E N T

_________________

 

1.  This is an appeal against sentence. The sentence of 12 months’ imprisonment which the Magistrate passed on this Appellant following his plea of guilty to possession of an identity card relating to another person is within the relevant sentencing guidelines, and the Magistrate was clearly right in her view that there is nothing in the circumstances to justify any departure from those guidelines.

2.  The Magistrate was also clearly right in her view that the period of administrative detention which the Appellant underwent from 17 April 2003 and 24 December 2004 while the Immigration Department processed his torture claim before releasing him on his own recognizances had nothing whatsoever to do with his present offence, and she was justified in not taking into account.

3.  There is no proper basis on which to interfere with this sentence, and the appeal against it is dismissed.

(V Bokhary)
Judge of the Court of First Instance
High Court

The Appellant appeared in person

Mr Frederick Chung, of the Department of Justice, for the respondent