Farhat v The Queen
[2017] NSWDC 206
•19 July 2017
|
New South Wales |
Case Name: | Farhat v R |
Medium Neutral Citation: | [2017] NSWDC 206 |
Hearing Date(s): | 19 July 2017 |
Date of Orders: | 19 July 2017 |
Decision Date: | 19 July 2017 |
Jurisdiction: | Criminal |
Before: | Bennett SC DCJ |
Decision: | (1) Allow the appeal |
Catchwords: | SENTENCING — Penalties — Good behaviour bond |
Category: | Principal judgment |
Parties: | Imran Farhat (Appellant) |
Representation: | Mr Oates (solicitor for the Appellant) |
File Number(s): | 2016/00331393 |
Decision under appeal: | |
Court or Tribunal: | Local Court |
Jurisdiction: | Criminal |
Date of Decision: | 11 May 2017 |
Before: | Hiatt LCM |
File Number(s): | 2016/00331393 |
REVISED EX TEMPORE JUDGEMENT
Imran Farhat will this year reach the age of 35 years. Upon the material before me he has no antecedent offences and I have before me a testimonial from his former wife and one from his employer, both speak of him in the most positive terms.
The relationship with his former wife failed and thereafter he remarried in circumstances whereby it was arranged. The marriage was performed in Pakistan.
In due course his second wife joined him in Australia, but there were issues evolving in the relationship which culminated with the conduct the subject of the charge to which the appellant pleaded guilty in the Local Court of assault occasional actual bodily harm. It occurred in circumstances where there was, I am told, a measure of acrimony between the appellant and his then second wife, which included disagreement regarding arrangements for his family to come to Australia for an extended visit. He asked his wife to make a telephone call to organise some accommodation but she declined to do so. They deteriorated into an argument, which unfortunately led to violence by the appellant.
According to the police facts he pushed her in the chest forcing her onto the seat of a lounge chair. He yelled abuse, she moved to the kitchen, there he struck her on the left side of her face with an open hand. She covered her face and turned away. He struck her again in the same fashion. He took hold of her left arm and pushed her into the kitchen wall and caused her pain to the rear of her right arm; that caused bruising. There is a photograph before me showing two areas of bruising to the back of her upper right arm and in the vicinity of the posterior aspect of her elbow. There is a shaded area, but it is not clear whether that is from the light available at the time the image was exposed. It is apparent that there are at least two areas of bruising. This is the actual bodily harm upon which the prosecution depends.
The appellant’s anger persisted and he took items from the kitchen bench and threw them onto the floor, including a glass jar containing sugar and a teacup. She walked toward the back door yelling for help; he pulled her back into the kitchen. He then went to the living room and closed the front windows. She ran from the house to the front gate. He demanded to know where she was going. She ran back into the house and collected her mobile phone and then ran some distance from the location and awaited the arrival of the police. The appellant drove to where she was. She entered the vehicle and they drove around for three hours after which he dropped her at Rooty Hill.
Their home where this occurred was at Doonside. Rooty Hill is a significant distance from Doonside. I am familiar with the area.
At the point where she was dropped the complainant was to be picked up by a friend; according to the facts she had called her friend to collect her there. There is no explanation here why that arrangement was in place, but be that as it may, the appellant did not abandon her at a remote location leaving her to make her own way home.
The police attended the residence but could not find anybody. They saw the damage. They returned later and spoke to the complainant and the appellant. She provided a version consistent with what I have read and later made a statement. The appellant was arrested. He participated in an interview but denied any violence and asserted that the argument was verbal in nature.
I am told upon instructions that he was first represented by a lawyer who wanted to defend the matter contrary to his instructions; ultimately the plea of guilty was entered on 30 March 2017. He was sentenced on 11 May 2017 and appealed from the conviction in the sense that he was hopeful of having the Court apply another provision to the determination of the matter. As the proceedings were evolving his family apparently came to Australia, but unfortunately his father died and arrangements were then required for the return of his body to Pakistan for the final resting place.
The circumstances before me are the domestic violence event of some significance resulting in injury amounting to actual bodily harm by a man, who has an otherwise clear record and can draw upon others to speak to his good character. Within the sequence of events he has suffered the additional tragedy of the loss of his father.
Their relationship is at an end. They are now divorced I am told. There is nothing put to challenge this; his wife was at court in the Local Court to offer him support. There is an Apprehended Violence Order in place for the protection of the complainant should there be a need for it.
Violence is to be abhorred and is to be denounced, particularly in the domestic violence setting. At the same time, each matter must be dealt with upon its own individual circumstances and the offender dealt with according to his subjective case upon which I might draw for the determination of sentence.
Bringing together all the matters that I have discussed, including the additional tragedy that he suffered with the loss of his father in the sequence of events that unfolded after the proceedings, I am satisfied that considering his good character generally, and in the absence of any antecedents, the fact that this is behaviour was I find to be an aberration, I am intending to allow the appeal.
The orders I make are:
The appeal is allowed and I set aside the conviction.
Without proceeding to conviction the offence is proved, but the appellant is discharged conditionally upon entering a bond for a period of 2 years from today.
The conditions of the bond are that he be of good behaviour and appear before court if called upon to do so.
He is to continue residing at his present address. If he is intending to move from that address at any time during the period of the bond he is to give written notice thereof by prepaid registered post to the Registrar of this Court and to the Office of Community Corrections at Blacktown.
The bond is to be supervised for such period as the officers deployed deem it necessary. To that end he is to attend upon the Community Corrections Office at Blacktown no later than the close of business of Friday this week, 21 July 2017. It shall be a breach of the bond if he fails to attend.
The nature of the orders and the consequences of breach were explained to the appellant. Exhibits to be retained on the file.
**********
0
0
1