R v Victor (CO 67/2017) [2019] SCSC 344 (28 March 2019);

Headnote and Holding: 

Sentence 1 year suspended for 3 years. Fine SCR155,000.

[1]        I have considered the mitigating factors addressed by learned counsel for the Convict and I take note that the Convict is a first time offender and the offence occurred sometime back in 2011. She was 20-21 years old at the time and that the offence although it involved money being stolen it did not involve any other aggravating factors such as violence.

[2]        The Convict is currently in gainful employment. She is the mother of three minor dependent children. Learned counsel has moved for leniency. The Social Services Report although simply go over the facts of what happened did not make any specific recommendation except what the Court deems to be fair.

[3]        In the circumstances of this case I am of the view that that a prison sentence on the Convict would not be beneficial to herself, her children and society. So I will impose the following sentence:

(1)  I impose a sentence of 1 year imprisonment which I would suspend for 3 years. That is she must not commit any similar offence for the next 3 years.

(2)  In addition to that I impose a fine of Rs155000 out of which Rs153,578.87 cents shall be reimbursed to the government as the money that was lost. The remaining Rs1421.63 cents shall remain as a fine.

(3)  She is given 4 years to conclude all the payment and in default of payment a sentence of 6 months imprisonment would be added and the sentence of 1 year may be activated as well.


Signed, dated and delivered at Ile du Port on 28 March 2019



Dodin J