Grewal v Director of Public Prosecutions - [2025] WASCA 26

JURISDICTION     :   SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
TITLE OF COURT :   THE COURT OF APPEAL (WA)
CITATION:   GREWAL -v- DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS [2025] WASCA 26
CORAM:   BUSS P
MAZZA JA
MITCHELL JA

HEARD:   14 FEBRUARY 2025
DELIVERED          :   14 FEBRUARY 2025
PUBLISHED           :   14 FEBRUARY 2025
FILE NO/S:   CACR 37 of 2024
BETWEEN:   BHUPINDER SINGH GREWAL
Appellant

AND

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS
Respondent

ON APPEAL FROM:
Jurisdiction              :   SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Coram:   LEMONIS J
Citation: GREWAL -v- DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS FOR WESTERN AUSTRALIA [2024] WASC 92
File Number            :   SJA 1017 of 2023

Catchwords:

Criminal law - Appellant convicted of offences committed against his wife and son in the Magistrates Court of Western Australia - Where primary judge dismissed appellant's appeal against his convictions to the General Division of the Supreme Court of Western Australia - Whether primary judge erred in dismissing the appeal to the General Division - Turns on own facts

Legislation:

Criminal Code (WA), s 301(1)(b), s 313(1)(a), s 444(1)(b)

Result:

Applications to adduce additional evidence dismissed
Leave to appeal refused
Appeal dismissed

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

Appellant	:	In person
Respondent	:	R P Arndt

Solicitors:

Appellant	:	In person
Respondent	:	Director of Public Prosecutions (WA)

Case(s) referred to in decision(s):

Nil

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT:

(These reasons were delivered ex temporaneously and have been edited from the court's record of the decision.)

On 1 February 2023, the appellant was convicted after trial in the Magistrates Court of Western Australia of the following three offences, all allegedly committed on 29 August 2021:
1.wilful and unlawful damage of an Apple iPhone 8 being the property of Parveen Kaur Grewal (the appellant's wife); contrary to s 444(1)(b) of the Criminal Code (WA);
2.unlawfully assaulting Ms Grewal; contrary to s 313(1)(a) of the Criminal Code; and
3.unlawful wounding of Gurvir Singh (the appellant's son), contrary to s 301(1)(b) of the Criminal Code.
It was a circumstance of aggravation of each offence that the appellant was in a family relationship with the victim. On 3 March 2023, the appellant was sentenced to a total effective sentence of 8 months' imprisonment, suspended for 8 months, in respect of this offending.
The appellant appealed against his convictions to the General Division of this court on 17 grounds of appeal. On 27 March 2024, the primary judge (Lemonis J) published written reasons for refusing leave to appeal on all grounds of appeal to the General Division and dismissing the appeal to the General Division: Grewal v Director of Public Prosecutions (WA) [2024] WASC 92. Those reasons contain a detailed account of the parties' cases and evidence led in the Magistrates Court. Having given detailed reasons why none of the grounds of appeal to the General Division were arguably established, his Honour dealt with and rejected various matters raised by the appellant's submissions which were not the subject of any ground of appeal in the General Division.
The appellant now appeals to this court against…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Grewal v Director of Public Prosecutions

Details

AGLC: Grewal v Director of Public Prosecutions [2025] WASCA 26
Case: [2025] WASCA 26
Decision Date: 14 FEBRUARY 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved an appellant who was convicted of offences committed against his wife and son in the Magistrates Court of Western Australia. The appellant sought to have his conviction overturned in the General Division of the Supreme Court, but the primary judge dismissed the appeal. The court was required to determine whether the primary judge made an error in dismissing the appeal.

The legal issues before the court involved the interpretation of the relevant sections of the Criminal Code and the application of the law to the facts of the case. The appellant argued that the primary judge had erred in dismissing the appeal, and that there were errors in the primary judge's findings of fact and in the application of the law. The court was required to consider the evidence presented and determine whether the primary judge's findings were correct and whether the law was applied appropriately.

The court found that the primary judge had not erred in dismissing the appeal. The court held that the primary judge's findings of fact were supported by the evidence, and that the law was applied correctly. The court also found that the appellant's arguments were not persuasive, and that there were no errors in the primary judge's reasoning. The court therefore dismissed the appeal.

No additional final orders were made by the court. The appeal was dismissed, and the convictions in the Magistrates Court remained in place.

Orders