New South Wales Crime Commission v Acharya

In the matter of New South Wales Crime Commission v Acharya, the Crime Commission sought ex-parte restraining orders against the defendant, Acharya, for alleged criminal activities. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The Commission argued that Acharya was involved in criminal conduct, including money laundering, and sought orders to prevent Acharya from engaging in activities that could result in further criminal activity. Acharya opposed the application on the basis that the application did not meet the threshold for making ex-parte orders and that the application was not supported by sufficient evidence.

The court was required to determine whether the application met the threshold for making ex-parte orders, and whether the application was supported by sufficient evidence. The court considered the evidence provided by the Commission and determined that the application met the threshold for making ex-parte orders. The court also found that the application was supported by sufficient evidence, including statements from witnesses and documents obtained from third parties. The court noted that Acharya had a history of criminal activity and that there was a real risk that he would continue to engage in criminal conduct if the orders were not made.

The court made the restraining orders sought by the Commission, and ordered that Acharya be restrained from engaging in certain activities, including dealing with the proceeds of crime and associating with certain individuals. The court also ordered that Acharya be subject to electronic monitoring and that he be required to report to police on a regular basis. Acharya was given the opportunity to oppose the orders, and the matter was listed for a further hearing. The court's decision highlights the importance of providing sufficient evidence to support an application for ex-parte orders, and the need for the court to carefully consider the threshold for making such orders.