R v Sultana

[2025] NSWSC 956

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Sultana [2025] NSWSC 956
Hearing dates:	08 July 2025
Date of orders:	08 July 2025
Decision date:	08 July 2025
Jurisdiction:	Common Law - Criminal
Before:	Garling J
Decision:	See [13]
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL PROCEDURE – Suppression and non-publication orders – Pseudonym order – Grounds – Where a suppression and non-publication order and pseudonym order is necessary for the protection of a police informant – Where the safety of a witness and the prevention of harm to the administration of justice significantly outweighs the public interest in open justice
Legislation Cited:	Court Suppression and Non-Publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW) ss 6, 8(1)
Cases Cited:	Not Applicable
Texts Cited:	Not Applicable
Category:	Procedural rulings
Parties:	The Crown Paul Jason Sultana (Accused) Commissioner of Police (Applicant)
Representation:	Counsel: Y Prowse (Crown) Dr G Woods KC (Accused) L Chapman (Commissioner of Police) Solicitors: Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) Proctor & Associates (Accused)
File Number(s):	2023/17108
Publication restriction:	Not Applicable

EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT

1. On 5 June 2025, the Commissioner of Police filed a Notice of Motion seeking various pseudonym, suppression and non-disclosure orders, together with orders for a closed court. The orders sought referred to a person who had been described in the documents as “Person A”.

2. The accused stands charged with the murder of Dayna Isaac (“the deceased”) on 16 January 2023. The accused was arrested and charged on 17 January 2023 and has since been held in custody.

3. On 14 November 2024, Person A provided a statement detailing conversations which he had engaged in with the accused in relation to the murder of the deceased.

4. Person A is to be called, by the Crown, as a witness to give evidence of these conversations, which include significant admissions on the part of the accused of his conduct in murdering the deceased.

5. Person A remains in custody, having been sentenced for his involvement in a serious crime. The evidence before the Court, of Assistant Commissioner Peter McKenna, who is also the Commander of the Central Metropolitan Regional Command, and who is a most experienced police officer and detective, is that it is, in summary, in the public interest that Person A’s name, identity and information tending to establish his identity be suppressed.

6. Assistant Commissioner McKenna expresses the view that where a person who is in custody has provided assistance to police, such a person may face harm if their name or identity becomes known within the custodial environment.

7. He says that, in his experience, persons who provide information to police whilst in custody will be treated with animosity by fellow inmates and their associates, and that they face a general risk of retribution and harm in the form of physical violence, simply because of their status as an informant or suspected informant.

8. These opinions of the Assistant Commissioner were not challenged, and the accused did not make any submissions opposing the making of the orders sought by the Commissioner.

9. I am satisfied that it is necessary, within the meaning of that term in the Court Suppression and Non-Publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW) (“the Act”) for the orders which have been sought to be made for the protection of the safety of Person A, and also to prevent harm to the administration of justice: s 8(1)(a), and s 8(1)(c) of the Act.

10. In coming to that conclusion, I have kept in mind, and taken into account, s 6 of the Act, which requires that this Court must take into account that:

“… a primary objective of the administration of justice is to safeguard the public interest in open justice.”

11. I have formed the view that the public interest in the making of the orders which are sought, by reason of the grounds to which I have referred in s 8 of the Act, significantly outweighs the public interest in open justice.

12. In light of these conclusions and the evidence put before the Court, I am satisfied that the orders sought by the applicant, the Commissioner of Police, should be made.

Orders

13. I make the following orders:

1. The proposed Crown Witness who has made a statement to police dated 14 November 2024 in these proceedings shall be known in these proceedings and on their statements by the pseudonym “Person A” (Person A).

2. Pursuant to s 7 of the Court Suppression and Non-publication Orders Act 2010 (CSNPO Act) and upon the grounds set out at s 8(1)(a), (c) and (e) of that Act, save for the purpose of the proper conduct of these proceedings, the true identity of Person A, be suppressed (within the meaning of s 3 of the CSNPO Act), together with any evidence, submission, discussion, document or information that might facilitate identification of Person A.

3. For the purposes of Order 2, information that identifies Person A or tends to identify the Witness includes, but is not limited to:

1. Person A’s name;

2. Person A’s image or any physical description of the Witness;

3. Person A’s location;

4. Person A’s criminal history; and

5. The fact of Person A’s past and/or future assistance to law enforcement and/or the Crown in any proceedings.

4. Pursuant to ss 11(2) and 12 of the CSNPO Act, Order 2 is to apply throughout the Commonwealth of Australia for a period of 30 years.

5. The accused is not to be permitted to retain a copy of any statement of Person A whilst in the custody of Corrective Services NSW.

6. The Court be closed for the duration of the evidence of Person A, except for the following persons who are permitted to remain:

1. The presiding judicial officer;

2. Any necessary court staff;

3. Officers of the Department of Corrective Services and NSW Sherriff’s Office;

4. The offender and their legal representatives;

5. The legal representatives of the Crown;

6. The legal representatives of the Commissioner;

7. The officer in charge of the investigation and any necessary officers of the NSW Police Force; and

8. The Jury.

7. The operation of Orders 2 and 3 above does not operate to prevent disclosure of the Crown Case Statement, the identity of Person A, information that may tend to identify Person A and evidence given by Person A in these proceedings, including written statements, to the following persons:

1. Solicitors and barristers at the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, including the Director and Deputy Directors directly involved in the criminal proceedings of R v Fraser Alexander Thomson (2023/0024149 and 2023/00267495).

2. Members of the New South Wales Police Force responsible for compiling the briefs of evidence and investigations referred to above; and

3. The legal representatives of Fraser Alexander Thomson on terms that they will not disclose the information other than to their client and only to the extent necessary to obtain instructions and provide legal advice. The accused Fraser Alexander Thomson is not permitted to have in his possession any statement of Person A and/or any document that discloses the identity of Person A, except while in the presence of his legal representative.

8. The Commissioner of Police is to be notified of any application for access to the Court file by a non-party to the proceedings, and is to have the opportunity to be heard prior to any decision on access to a non-party.

9. The Commissioner of Police is to be informed of any application to vary or revoke these orders.

.**********

Decision last updated: 25 September 2025