區域法院（刑事）His Honour Judge E Yip16/10/2025[2025] HKDC 1667
DCCC667/2025
A A
B B
DCCC 667/2025
C [2025] HKDC 1667 C
D D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
E HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION E
CRIMINAL CASE NO 667 OF 2025
F F
G ---------------------------------------- G
HKSAR
H H
v
I SHAH MUSTAJAB HUSSAIN I
----------------------------------------
J J
K Before: His Honour Judge E Yip K
Date: 17 October 2025
L L
Present: Ms Yasmine Zahir, Counsel on fiat, for HKSAR
M Mr Edward Laskey, instructed by Nasirs, assigned by the M
Director of Legal Aid, for the defendant
N N
Offence: Burglary（入屋犯法罪）
O O
P
-------------------------------------- P
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
Q Q
--------------------------------------
R R
1. The Defendant pleads guilty to one count of burglary,
S S
contrary to section 11(1)(b) and (4) of the Theft Ordinance, Cap 210. The
T offence arises from an incident on 4 December 2024, when the Defendant T
entered as a trespasser part of a fitness centre on the second floor of a
U U
V V
-2-
A A
B B
building in Tsim Sha Tsui (“the Premises”), and stole cash and electronic
C items therein. C
D D
2. At around 10:20 pm on 3 December 2024, PW1, who was the
E owner of the fitness centre, locked the Premises and left. When he returned E
the following morning, he found the latch of the rear door damaged. The
F F
main entrance and the rear door were unconnected on the second floor.
G This means anyone trying to get to the rear door had to enter the Premises, G
or else go down to the ground floor and take the independent stairs up to
H H
the rear door. CCTV footage revealed that at about 12:47 am on 4
I December 2024, a male intruder damaged the rear door, entered and I
ransacked the Premises. He left at around 7:05 am after having stolen cash
J J
in the amount of HK$11,000, 2 iPhones valued at HK$17,000, and a pair
K of AirPods valued at HK$2,000. The said cash and property were not K
recovered.
L L
M 3. On 13 December 2024, the Defendant was stopped by police M
officers in the vicinity of Shanghai Street after being recognised from the
N N
CCTV images. Under caution, he admitted that he was the person in the
O footage and confessed to stealing the items from the Premises, stating that O
he had already spent the stolen cash and discarded the electronic devices.
P P
His fingerprints were later found on a metal locker inside the Premises,
Q confirming his involvement. Q
R R
4. The Defendant has 2 previous convictions for dangerous
S driving in 2017 and 2024 respectively, for each of which he was fined and S
disqualified from driving.
T T
U U
V V
-3-
A A
B B
5. The Defence submits that the Defendant has pleaded guilty at
C the earliest opportunity, showing genuine remorse and acceptance of C
responsibility. His plea has saved the court and prosecution valuable time
D D
and resources. The burglary, though serious, was not accompanied by any
E violence, threats, or the use of tools. It occurred in non-domestic premises E
when no persons were present, thus reducing the element of fear or danger.
F F
The Defendant acted alone and there is no evidence of planning or
G sophistication. The burglary appears to have been an impulsive, G
opportunistic act rather than a premeditated one.
H H
I 6. The Defence further invites the Court to consider the I
Defendant’s personal background. He was born and raised in Hong Kong,
J J
completed Form 6, and attended a course in Information and
K Communication Technology in 2016–2017. His father died in a car K
accident in Pakistan in 2016, an event which caused him psychiatric
L L
distress, for which he received treatment at West Kowloon. His mother
M was also injured in an accident and suffers spinal injuries. At the time of M
the offence, the Defendant was working as a delivery worker earning a
N N
modest income of around HK$10,000 per month. His financial
O circumstances were strained, and he succumbed to poor judgment. O
Counsel submits that the Defendant’s actions were borne out of hardship
P P
rather than greed or professional intent.
Q Q
7. There are 2 letters from the community centers indicating that
R R
the Defendant had rendered voluntary services in 2017. The description is
S sketchy. While I should not disregard this matter, the discount in the S
sentence cannot be much.
T T
U U
V V
-4-
A A
B B
8. The burglary was of non-domestic premises. The
C conventional starting point is 30 months’ imprisonment, as established in C
HKSAR v Sim Ka Wing CACC 450/2000. The Court of Appeal has made
D D
clear that where the burglary is opportunistic, unplanned, and of relatively
E low value, a downward adjustment from that conventional starting point E
may be appropriate.
F F
G 9. In the present case, however, the Defendant had tried to enter G
by the main entrance but failed to do so. He then damaged the latch of the
H H
rear door as he entered. The property had not been recovered. I do not
I regard him as an entirely opportunistic sneak thief. I therefore adopt a I
starting point of 27 months’ imprisonment.
J J
K 10. The Defendant is entitled to a reduction of one-third for his K
early guilty plea, which brings the sentence down to 18 months’
L L
imprisonment. I give 2 weeks’ discount for his voluntary services. The
M sentence is 17 months and 2 weeks. M
N N
O O
( E Yip )
P P
District Judge
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V
A A
B B
DCCC 667/2025
C [2025] HKDC 1667 C
D D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
E HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION E
CRIMINAL CASE NO 667 OF 2025
F F
G ---------------------------------------- G
HKSAR
H H
v
I SHAH MUSTAJAB HUSSAIN I
----------------------------------------
J J
K Before: His Honour Judge E Yip K
Date: 17 October 2025
L L
Present: Ms Yasmine Zahir, Counsel on fiat, for HKSAR
M Mr Edward Laskey, instructed by Nasirs, assigned by the M
Director of Legal Aid, for the defendant
N N
Offence: Burglary（入屋犯法罪）
O O
P
-------------------------------------- P
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
Q Q
--------------------------------------
R R
1. The Defendant pleads guilty to one count of burglary,
S S
contrary to section 11(1)(b) and (4) of the Theft Ordinance, Cap 210. The
T offence arises from an incident on 4 December 2024, when the Defendant T
entered as a trespasser part of a fitness centre on the second floor of a
U U
V V
-2-
A A
B B
building in Tsim Sha Tsui (“the Premises”), and stole cash and electronic
C items therein. C
D D
2. At around 10:20 pm on 3 December 2024, PW1, who was the
E owner of the fitness centre, locked the Premises and left. When he returned E
the following morning, he found the latch of the rear door damaged. The
F F
main entrance and the rear door were unconnected on the second floor.
G This means anyone trying to get to the rear door had to enter the Premises, G
or else go down to the ground floor and take the independent stairs up to
H H
the rear door. CCTV footage revealed that at about 12:47 am on 4
I December 2024, a male intruder damaged the rear door, entered and I
ransacked the Premises. He left at around 7:05 am after having stolen cash
J J
in the amount of HK$11,000, 2 iPhones valued at HK$17,000, and a pair
K of AirPods valued at HK$2,000. The said cash and property were not K
recovered.
L L
M 3. On 13 December 2024, the Defendant was stopped by police M
officers in the vicinity of Shanghai Street after being recognised from the
N N
CCTV images. Under caution, he admitted that he was the person in the
O footage and confessed to stealing the items from the Premises, stating that O
he had already spent the stolen cash and discarded the electronic devices.
P P
His fingerprints were later found on a metal locker inside the Premises,
Q confirming his involvement. Q
R R
4. The Defendant has 2 previous convictions for dangerous
S driving in 2017 and 2024 respectively, for each of which he was fined and S
disqualified from driving.
T T
U U
V V
-3-
A A
B B
5. The Defence submits that the Defendant has pleaded guilty at
C the earliest opportunity, showing genuine remorse and acceptance of C
responsibility. His plea has saved the court and prosecution valuable time
D D
and resources. The burglary, though serious, was not accompanied by any
E violence, threats, or the use of tools. It occurred in non-domestic premises E
when no persons were present, thus reducing the element of fear or danger.
F F
The Defendant acted alone and there is no evidence of planning or
G sophistication. The burglary appears to have been an impulsive, G
opportunistic act rather than a premeditated one.
H H
I 6. The Defence further invites the Court to consider the I
Defendant’s personal background. He was born and raised in Hong Kong,
J J
completed Form 6, and attended a course in Information and
K Communication Technology in 2016–2017. His father died in a car K
accident in Pakistan in 2016, an event which caused him psychiatric
L L
distress, for which he received treatment at West Kowloon. His mother
M was also injured in an accident and suffers spinal injuries. At the time of M
the offence, the Defendant was working as a delivery worker earning a
N N
modest income of around HK$10,000 per month. His financial
O circumstances were strained, and he succumbed to poor judgment. O
Counsel submits that the Defendant’s actions were borne out of hardship
P P
rather than greed or professional intent.
Q Q
7. There are 2 letters from the community centers indicating that
R R
the Defendant had rendered voluntary services in 2017. The description is
S sketchy. While I should not disregard this matter, the discount in the S
sentence cannot be much.
T T
U U
V V
-4-
A A
B B
8. The burglary was of non-domestic premises. The
C conventional starting point is 30 months’ imprisonment, as established in C
HKSAR v Sim Ka Wing CACC 450/2000. The Court of Appeal has made
D D
clear that where the burglary is opportunistic, unplanned, and of relatively
E low value, a downward adjustment from that conventional starting point E
may be appropriate.
F F
G 9. In the present case, however, the Defendant had tried to enter G
by the main entrance but failed to do so. He then damaged the latch of the
H H
rear door as he entered. The property had not been recovered. I do not
I regard him as an entirely opportunistic sneak thief. I therefore adopt a I
starting point of 27 months’ imprisonment.
J J
K 10. The Defendant is entitled to a reduction of one-third for his K
early guilty plea, which brings the sentence down to 18 months’
L L
imprisonment. I give 2 weeks’ discount for his voluntary services. The
M sentence is 17 months and 2 weeks. M
N N
O O
( E Yip )
P P
District Judge
Q Q
R R
S S
T T
U U
V V
DCCC667/2025 HKSAR v. SHAH MUSTAJAB HUSSAIN - LawHero