SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

1995 MarsdenLR 1774

HIGH COURT (BRUNEI DARUSSALAM)

DENYS ROBERTS, CJ


PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
versus
FLORA C. CRUZ

CRIMINAL TRAIL NO. 13 OF 1994

Decided On : 02-20-95

Advocates:
For the public prosecutor - Shazale
For the accused - in person

JUDGMENT

Denys Roberts CJ:

The two defendants, Flora C. Cruz (D1) and Rolando F. Ayson (D2), both Philippine nationals, faced 25 charges between them.

Charges 1 to 20 comprised 10 pairs of charges brought against both of them.

For example, charges 1 and 2 read as follows:

1st Charge

That both of you, on or about 8 August 1994, at Capital Hotel, Brunei Darussalam, in furtherance of your common intention, used as genuine counterfeit banknotes, (as listed in Appendix S attached herewith) knowing or having reason to believe the same to be counterfeit, and that both of you thereby committed an offence punishable under s.489B of the Penal Code (Cap. 22) read with s.34 of the same.

2nd Charge

That both of you, on or about 8 August 1994, at Capital Hotel, Brunei Darussalam, in furtherance of your common intention, cheated Capital Hotel by dishonestly causing it to believe that the traveller's cheques (amounting to USD430 as listed in Appendix S attached herewith) which you presented for cashing were genuine when in fact they were counterfeit and thereby dishonestly induced the said hotel to deliver to both of you a sum amounting to BD559 and which was the property of the said hotel and that both of you thereby committed an offence punishable under s.420 of the Penal Code (Cap. 25) read with s.34 of the same.

Charges 3 and 4 alleged the use of counterfeit banknotes ("T.C.") at the Capital Hotel of a value of USD230 on 9 August 1994;

Charges 5 and 6 alleged the use of counterfeit banknotes at the Jubilee Hotel of a value of USD1,600 on 9 August 1994;

Charges 7 and 8 alleged the use of counterfeit banknotes at the Sheraton Utama Hotel of a value of USD1,000 on 7 August 1994;

Charges 9 and 10 alleged the use of counterfeit banknotes at the Princess Inn Hotel of a value of USD500 on 7 August 1994;

Charges 11 and 12 alleged the use of counterfeit banknotes at the Princess Inn Hotel of a value of USD250 on 6 August 1994;

Charges 13 and 14 alleged the use of counterfeit banknotes at the Terrace Hotel of a value of USD500 on 8 August 1994;

Charges 15 and 16 alleged the use of counterfeit banknotes at the Terrace Hotel of a value of USD300 on 8 August 1994;

Charges 17 and 18 alleged the use of counterfeit banknotes at the Terrace Hotel of a value of USD400 on 8 August 1994;

Charges 19 and 20 alleged the use of counterfeit banknotes at the Terrace Hotel of a value of USD100 on 8 August 1994, presented as a room deposit.

Charges 1 to 20 were ten pairs. The first charge in each pair was of an offence against s.489B of the Penal Code (PC), the maximum penalty for which is 15 years and a fine. The second such charge was of cheating, contrary to s.420 PC, the maximum penalty for which is 7 years and a fine, except for charge 20, which contained a charge against s.417 PC for cheating.

Both defendants were charged (charge 21) with possession of counterfeit banknotes, amounting to USD17,600 on 9 August 1994.

D1 alone faced three charges.

Charge 22 alleged that, on 9 August 1994, she was in possession of a Philippine passport (H321354) which had been tampered with, contrary to s.12(1)(a), of the Passports Act, the maximum penalty for which is 5 years and a fine of BD10,000.

Charges 23 and 24 alleged and D1 used counterfeit banknotes as a room deposit at the Capital Hotel of a value of USD200 on 7 August 1994.

D2 alone faced charge 25, which alleged that, on 9 August 1994, he was in possession of a Philippine passport (L375893) which had been tampered with, contrary to s.12(1)(a) of the Passports Act.

On the second day of the trial, the prosecution offered no further evidence on charges 22 and 25. The defendants were discharged on these charges, such discharges not amounting to an acquittal (s.186 CPC).

The first 20 charges were read and explained to the defendants.

D1 replied - "I did not do it".

D2 replied - "I did it alone. I did not know that the banknotes were forged".

On charge 21, D1 replied "I admit I was in possession, but I did not know the trav

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top