R v Oreddy (C0 78/2020) [2021] SCSC 1008 (7 October 2021)

SUPREME COURT OF SEYCHELLES Reportable [2021] SCSC b3Cj' C078/2020 Republic Accused In the matter between: THE REPUBLIC (rep. by Evelyn Almeida) and YOHAN OREDDY (rep. by S. Rajasundaram) Neutral Citation: Before: Heard: Delivered: Rep v Oreddy (C078/2020) Burhan J 06th September 2021 07 October 2021 [2021] sese (07 October 2021) ORDER I proceed to sentence the accused as follows: Count 1 - a fine of SCR 2500 (two thousand five hundred) in default of payment of fine 3 months imprisonment. Count 2- A term of three years imprisonment The default offine payment term of three month imprisonment imposed in Count 1, should run consecutive to the three years imprisonment imposed in Count 2. SENTENCE BURHANJ [I] The accused Yohan Oreddy was convicted on his own plea of guilt for the following offences: Countl Possession of a controlled drug contrary to Section 8(1) of the Misuse of Drugs Act and punishable under the second schedule of the Misuse of Drugs Act 2016 Particulars of offence are that, Yohan Kenny Oreddy of Anse Aux Pins, Mahe, on the 28117 June 2020, at his residence Chetty Flat, Anse Aux Pins, Mahe, wasfound in possession of a controlled drug, namely, cannabis resin, with a total net weight of 17.12grams. Count 2 Trafficking by way of possession of a controlled drug with intent to traffic contrary to Section 9 (1) as read wth Section 19 (1) (c) of the Misuse of Drugs Act, 2016 and punishable under Section 7 (1) and second schedule of the Misuse of Drugs Act 2016. Particulars of offence are that, Yohan Kenny Oreddy ofAnse Aux Pins, Mahe, on the 28th June 2020, at his residence Chetty Flat, Anse Aux Pins, Mahe, was trafficking a controlled drug by virtue of being found in unlawful possession of a substance which contained a controlled drug namely Heroin (Diamorphine) with a purity of38.25grams, giving rise to a rebuttable presumption of having possessed the said controlled drug with intent to traffi [2] At the request of his learned Counsel Mr. Rajasundaram a probation report was called. According to the report the accused is 23 years old and lives with his partner and a son 3 years old who has a physical disability, whereby he is unable to stand and also with his father who is blind. The employment history of the accused indicates he worked as a steward at Eden Bleu, a tray layer at Sky Chef and as a traffic Warden for six months. He had subsequently done a landscaping business. According to the report the accused suffers from asthma and has taken Hashish from the age of 16 and started taking Heroin at 18 years. Although he stated he had stopped at 21 and taken cigarettes, it appears from the recent blood report taken he has tested positive for Cannabis which report has been attached. [3] It is clear from the probation report that the accused had trafficked in controlled drugs to feed his addiction for Heroin. The probation report has recommended the imposition of a suspended sentence. [4] I have also considered the plea in mitigation made by learned Counsel Mr. Rajasundaram who states that it was the economic situation of the accused that led him to commit these offences. He also moved Court to consider the repercussions of a custodial term would have on the family of the accused. [5] I have considered all the facts before Court. The accused is a first offender and has pleaded guilty at the very first opportunity thereby expressing remorse and regret and expecting leniency from Court. However considering Count 2, I am the view that the pure quantity of Class A drug detected 38.25 grams is high and warrants a custodial term. The recommended sentence for the possession of such a quantity of controlled drug is five to eight years imprisonment. [6] Giving due consideration to all these factors especially his family circumstances, I proceed to sentence the accused as follows: Count 1 - a fine of SCR 2500 (two thousand five hundred) in default of payment of fine 3 months imprisonment. Count 2- A term of three years imprisonment The default offine payment term of three month imprisonment imposed in Count 1, should run consecutive to the term of three years imprisonment imposed in Count 2. The accused is entitled to remission at the discretion of the Superintendent of Prisons. [7] Right of appeal explained. elivered at lie du Port on 07 October 2021. M Burhan J 4