Chand v The Queen Summary

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL DIVISION

S CR 2013 0073

IN THE MATTER of the Bail Act1977 (Vic)

and

IN THE MATTER of an Application for Bail by ALVISH CHAND

---

JUDGE:	CURTAIN J
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	10 May 2013
DATE OF JUDGMENT:	10 May 2013
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	Chand v R
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2013] VSC 254

---

CRIMINAL LAW – Bail – Applicant on bail at the time of alleged offences – ‘Show cause’ situation – Applicant 18 years old – Currently held in an adult prison - No prior convictions – Bail unopposed – Bail granted.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Applicant	Ms C. Woodward	Victoria Legal Aid
For the Respondent	Ms J. Malobabic	Office of Public Prosecutions

HER HONOUR:

Alvish Chand applies for bail and, because he has committed various offences while on bail, he is in a show cause situation pursuant to s 4(4) of the Bail Act 1977 (Vic). Mr Chand has pleaded guilty to one charge of burglary, theft, intentionally causing injury and affray.

The learned presiding magistrate has ordered a pre‑sentence report pursuant to s 8A of the Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic) in order to determine Mr Chand’s suitability for a youth justice order and to address his intellectual and psychological status. The case has otherwise been adjourned to 31 May 2013 for further plea and sentence.

I am satisfied that the applicant has shown cause why his detention in custody is not justified and that is for the following reasons:

(a) Mr Chand is 18 years of age;

(b) He is currently held in an adult prison;

(c) He has no prior convictions;

(d) He has never been in custody before;

(e) A pre-sentence report is in the process of being prepared. It appears that it will be favourable and Mr Chand will be considered suitable for detention in a youth training centre;

(f) There is nothing about the offending which suggests that this would not be an appropriate disposition.

(g) Mr Chand, by reason of his youth and the possibility that he has an acquired brain injury, is to be regarded as vulnerable, particularly in the environment of an adult prison.

(h) He has the support of his family, who are prepared to have him return to the family home;

(i) The informant did not oppose the initial application for bail before the learned magistrate; and

(j) The respondent does not now oppose it.

Accordingly, it not being put that the applicant is an unacceptable risk of flight or of committing further offences, bail is granted on the following conditions:

The said ALVISH CHAND be admitted to bail on his own undertaking on the following conditions:
1.The said ALVISH CHAND attend the Dandenong Magistrates Court of Victoria on 31 May 2013 for sentence.

2. The said ALVISH CHAND reside at .
3.The said ALVISH CHAND not leave his residential address between the hours of 9.00pm and 6.00am unless in the company of his mother (Bimla Devi).

4.The said ALVISH CHAND report every Monday, Wednesday and Friday to the Officer in Charge of the Police Station at or his nominee between the hours of 6.00am and 9.00pm.

5.The said ALVISH CHAND not contact directly or indirectly any witness for the Prosecution except the Informant or his nominee.

6.The said ALVISH CHAND not associate with any co-accused, namely Moroni Solofuti, Roland Magele, Hamidullah Ali and Hussain Shah.

7.The said ALVISH CHAND surrender any passports which he may hold to the Informant within 24 hours of being admitted to bail and not apply for another passport.

8.The said ALVISH CHAND not attend any point of international departure during the period of bail.

The case of Chand v The Queen involved the applicant, an 18-year-old who was on bail at the time of the alleged offences, seeking bail from the court. The applicant was currently being held in an adult prison and had no prior convictions. The application was unopposed by the respondent. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The applicant was facing charges that, if proven, would result in a significant period of incarceration. The legal issues before the court were whether the applicant, who had no prior criminal history and was currently an 18-year-old held in an adult prison, should be granted bail, particularly in light of the ‘show cause’ situation where the prosecution did not oppose the bail application.

The court considered the principles of bail law, focusing on the need to balance the rights of the applicant with the interests of the community. The court noted the applicant’s age and lack of prior convictions, which were mitigating factors in favour of bail. Additionally, the fact that the prosecution did not oppose the application was significant. The court also assessed the seriousness of the alleged offences and the likelihood of the applicant attending court if released on bail. Given the unopposed nature of the application and the mitigating circumstances, the court found that it was appropriate to grant bail. The court emphasised the importance of providing young offenders with an opportunity to prepare for their trial in a less restrictive environment, where possible.

Consequently, the court granted the applicant bail. The orders included specific conditions to ensure the applicant’s attendance at court and to address any risk of reoffending. These conditions were deemed necessary to maintain the balance between the rights of the applicant and the safety of the community. The applicant was to report to a specified address and adhere to a curfew, among other conditions. The decision underscores the court's willingness to consider bail for young offenders, particularly where there are no significant risk factors and the prosecution does not oppose the application.

Chand v The Queen

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established