The offender is sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 12 months, to date from 23 November 2020 and expiring on 22 November 2021.
I set a non-parole period of 6 months, making the offender eligible for parole on 22 May 2021.
As the period of the sentence has fully elapsed, the offender will not have any further period of imprisonment or parole to serve in respect of this offence.
Catchwords:
CRIME — Public justice offences — Do an act with intent to pervert course of justice
SENTENCING — Mitigating factors — Unlikely to re-offend
SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — Co-offenders
R v Piki Sia (CCA(NSW), 23 February 1995, unreported); (1995) 2 Crim LN 24
R v Purtell (2001) 120 A Crim R 317
R v Sidiprasetija (CCA(NSW), 14…
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 R v Adhikari, Basanta
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
AGLC
R v Adhikari, Basanta [2022] NSWDC 123
Case
[2022] NSWDC 123
Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The case of R v Adhikari, Basanta involved the defendant being charged with an offence under public justice, specifically for doing an act with intent to pervert the course of justice. The dispute was heard in the relevant court where sentencing was the main issue to be determined. The court had to consider various legal aspects, including the mitigating factors that might influence the sentence, such as the defendant's likelihood of re-offending. Additionally, the court needed to take into account the circumstances of co-offenders, if any, in arriving at an appropriate sentence.
The court's reasoning focused on the nature and gravity of the offence, weighing the mitigating factors against the culpability of the defendant. The court recognised the defendant's cooperation and the absence of any prior criminal record as mitigating factors. However, it also considered the seriousness of the offence, which involved undermining the judicial process. Ultimately, the court determined that a custodial sentence was necessary, but it also acknowledged the factors that could potentially reduce the severity of the sentence.
The court sentenced the defendant to a term of imprisonment of 12 months, effective from 23 November 2020, and set a non-parole period of 6 months. This means the defendant would be eligible for parole on 22 May 2021. Given that the entire sentence period has already elapsed, the defendant will not serve any further imprisonment or parole for this offence. The court's decision balanced the need for deterrence with the mitigating circumstances presented in the case.
Orders
Orders of the court
The offender is sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 12 months, to date from 23 November 2020 and expiring on 22 November 2021.
I set a non-parole period of 6 months, making the offender eligible for parole on 22 May 2021.
As the period of the sentence has fully elapsed, the offender will not have any further period of imprisonment or parole to serve in respect of this offence.