Legal Research
Cases
R v Ahmed (No 2)

R v Ahmed (No 2)

Case [2023] NSWSC 105 17 February 2023

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Ahmed (No 2) [2023] NSWSC 105
Hearing dates: 10 February 2023
Date of orders: 17 February 2023
Decision date: 17 February 2023
Jurisdiction: Common Law
Before: N Adams J
Decision:
For the offence of murder, Shahab Ahmed is convicted and sentenced to:
(1) Imprisonment for a term of 24 years to commence on 18 February 2017 and expire on 17 February 2041.
(2) The non-parole period is 18 years’ imprisonment to commence on 18 February 2017 and expire on 17 February 2035.

Catchwords:
CRIME – SENTENCE – murder – wife stabbed with a knife in home – multiple stab wounds – conviction following jury trial – plea of guilty to manslaughter on the basis of substantial impairment by abnormality of mind – offender was not substantially impaired but flew into jealous rage – not premediated – offender facilitated justice – remorse shown

Legislation Cited:
Crimes Act1900 (NSW), ss 18(1)(a), 23A, 23A(1)(a), 23A(8)
Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW), s 25C
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 30E(1), 30E(3), 47(3)
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 30E(1), 30E(3), 47(3)
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), Table to Division 1A of Part 4

Cases Cited:
Ahmed v R [2021] NSWCCA 280
Butters v R [2010] NSWCCA 1
DH v R [2022] NSWCCA 200
DS v R; DM v R [2022] NSWCCA 156
KM v R [2023] NSWCCA 10
Lechmana v R [2019] NSWCCA 112
Muldrock v The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 120; [2011] HCA 39
Pritchard v R [2022] NSWCCA 130
R HMcLv The Queen (2000) 203 CLR 452; [2000] HCA 46
R v Ahmed (No 2) [2019] NSWSC 517
R v Ahmed (No 3) [2019] NSWSC 625
R v Halloun [2014] NSWSC 1705
R v Haydar(No 4) [2017] NSWSC 615
R v Isaacs (1997) 41 NSWLR 374
R v Latu (No 3) [2019] NSWSC 951
R v Lechmana [2010] NSWSC 849
R v Simpson (2001) 53 NSWLR 704; [2001] NSWCCA 534
R v Sumpton [2016] NSWCCA 162

Category: Sentence
Parties: Rex (Crown)
Shahab Uddin Ahmed (Offender)
Representation:
Counsel:
Ms F Gray (Crown)
Mr T Woods/Mr A Khoury (Offender)
Solicitors:
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (NSW) (Crown)
Mr U Amin, Olympus Law Partners (Offender)

File Number(s): 2017/52488
Publication restriction: Nil.

Judgment

On 18 February 2017, Shahab Ahmed, the offender, stabbed his wife Khondkar Fariha Elahi 14 times over her body in a frenzied attack in her own home. She was stabbed with such ferocity that the tip of the knife snapped off and was later found lodged between two of her teeth. As she lay dying on her bed begging for forgiveness, the offender smoked some cigarettes, made entries on his Facebook page and logged into Ms Elahi’s Facebook page to make an entry there as well. By the time he telephoned police to report what he had done, he knew that Ms Elahi was dead.
The offender made full…

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 Ahmed (No 2)

Details

AGLC: R v Ahmed (No 2) [2023] NSWSC 105
Case: [2023] NSWSC 105
Decision Date: 17 February 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved the defendant, Ahmed, who was convicted of the murder of his wife, whom he stabbed multiple times in their home. The case came before the court for sentencing, following a jury trial where Ahmed pleaded guilty to manslaughter on the basis of substantial impairment by abnormality of mind. However, the court found that Ahmed was not substantially impaired but had instead acted out of a jealous rage, albeit not premeditated. Ahmed had facilitated justice by showing remorse and had pleaded guilty to manslaughter.

The legal issues the court was required to decide included the appropriate sentence for the offence of murder, considering the mitigating factors of Ahmed's lack of premeditation and his remorse. The court also had to consider the plea of guilty to manslaughter and the circumstances of the offence, including the manner in which the victim was killed and the offender's state of mind at the time of the offence.

The court found that, while Ahmed's actions were not premeditated, they were nonetheless violent and resulted in the death of his wife. The court considered the mitigating factors of Ahmed's lack of premeditation and his remorse, but ultimately found that these factors did not outweigh the seriousness of the offence. The court sentenced Ahmed to a term of imprisonment, reflecting the gravity of the offence and the need to protect the community. The court also noted that Ahmed's facilitation of justice and his remorse were factors in his favour, but did not outweigh the need for punishment and deterrence.

Orders