Maruf Hussain v The Queen

Maruf Hussain appealed against his conviction and sentence for an act of indecency without consent. The appeal was heard by the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Court of Criminal Appeal.

The primary legal issues before the Court were whether the trial judge erred in directing the jury to accept either the appellant's evidence or that of the complainant, whether the trial miscarried due to the judge referring to matters not in evidence or indicating his opinion of the appellant's guilt, and whether the trial miscarried due to the judge posing questions to the accused or the prosecution failing to give adequate notice of a witness and the nature of her evidence. The Court also considered whether there was a manifest excess in the sentence imposed.

The Court reasoned that directions to the jury on onus and standard of proof were unexceptionable and that portions of directions must be viewed in the context of the directions as a whole. It held that there is no requirement to accept the evidence of a complainant on the basis of rejecting the evidence of the accused. The Court noted that the failure of trial counsel to raise objections to the judge's directions, the questions posed to the accused, or the prosecution's witness was a reasonably reliable indicator of the fairness of the trial. Applying section 37O(3) of the Supreme Court Act 1933 (ACT), the Court found no substantial miscarriage of justice. Regarding sentence, while the appellant had no prior criminal history, the objective seriousness of the offence was not at the bottom of the range, and the maximum penalty was seven years' imprisonment.

The appeals against conviction and sentence were dismissed.