Aggarwal v The Queen

The High Court of Australia considered an appeal by Mr Aggarwal against his conviction for a number of offences, including conspiracy to import a commercial quantity of heroin and conspiracy to possess a commercial quantity of heroin. The prosecution alleged that Mr Aggarwal was involved in a conspiracy to import heroin from Thailand into Australia.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the trial judge had erred in admitting evidence of certain conversations between Mr Aggarwal and a co-conspirator, which had been recorded by law enforcement officers. Specifically, the Court had to determine whether this evidence was admissible under the principles governing the admission of evidence of co-conspirators, particularly in light of the fact that the co-conspirator had not been apprehended or brought to trial.

The High Court, by majority, held that the evidence of the recorded conversations was admissible. The Court reasoned that the rule in *R v Teper* [1952] AC 480, which generally requires that statements made by a co-conspirator be made in furtherance of the common design, was not absolute. In this instance, the recorded conversations were found to be relevant to establishing the existence of the conspiracy and Mr Aggarwal's participation in it, even though the co-conspirator was not available to give evidence. The Court emphasised that the admissibility of such evidence is a matter for the trial judge's discretion, to be exercised by balancing the probative value of the evidence against any potential prejudice to the accused.

The appeal was dismissed.