Maharaj’s No Case to Answer Ruling Set Aside

The Anti-Corruption High Court of Suva has ruled that there was an error made by the magistrate in a no case to answer ruling in favour of Bobby Maharaj.

The former CEO of the then Fiji Commerce Commission (FCC), appeared at the High Court in Suva before Anti-Corruption High Court Judge Justice Dr Thushara Kumarage. Maharaj is charged with one count of abuse of office by FICAC.

It is alleged that between March 17, 2012, and December 31, 2012, while Mr Maharaj was CEO of FCC abused his authority by directing Sanjay Menon, an employee, without conducting an inspection, to fill in false information in the FCC Inspection No. 10A to indicate that an inspection was conducted at Rajah’s Food Court and Bakery in Korovou on December 19, 2011, and a verbal warning was issued against the said Rajah’s Food Court and Bakery for breaches under the Commerce Commission Decree, which was an act prejudicial to the rights of the FCC and Rajah’s Food Court and Bakery.

Magistrate Jioji Boseiwaqa, at the time, ruled a no case to answer and acquitted Maharaj after the submissions were filed by defence counsel.

On the grounds of appeal, FICAC stated that the learned magistrate erred in fact and law by failing to analyse the evidence objectively in its entirety.

They also stated that the learned Magistrate erred in fact and law and misconceived when he decided that the exhibit no PE17 had been discredited and unreliable to have any probative value; that the learned Magistrate erred in fact and law when he applied his misconceived analysis of the evidence of PE17 to the elements of the offence and failed to analyse the elements of the offence properly; and that the learned Magistrate erred in fact and law by giving undue weight to the good character evidence at the no case to answer stage of the hearing.

In his judgment, Justice Dr Kumarage said acting under Section 256 (2)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Act 2009, the court sets aside the no case to answer ruling made by the learned Magistrate in this matter and directed the learned Magistrate to call for the defence of Maharaj and make a final determination on the charge filed in the Magistrates Court.