The court found that, despite the accused's youth and potential for reform, the gravity of the offence—killing his own father following a family disagreement—warranted a custodial sentence. The social enquiry report revealed strong opposition from the family and community to a non-custodial sentence, and a real risk of harm to the accused if released. The court considered the period already spent in custody and determined that a sentence of seven years' imprisonment, effective from the date of first appearance, was appropriate to balance the interests of justice, deterrence, and rehabilitation.