Legal Research
Cases
Rawat v The King

Rawat v The King

Case [2024] NSWCCA 64 8 May 2024

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

Court of Criminal Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Rawat v R [2024] NSWCCA 64
Hearing dates: 15 April 2024
Date of orders: 8 May 2024
Decision date: 08 May 2024
Before: Wright J at [1];
Chen J at [2];
McNaughton J at [69]
Decision:
(1) Grant leave to the applicant to appeal against the sentence imposed on 22 August 2023.
(2) Dismiss the appeal against the sentence.

Catchwords:
CRIME – appeals – appeals against sentence – manifest excess – alleged error in the finding of the sentencing judge that the applicant had a lack of understanding of issues relating to consent – where applicant pleaded guilty to one count of sexual touching – where sentencing judge found that an ICO was technically available but would not sufficiently serve the purposes of sentencing, in particular, victim vindication, retribution and general deterrence – no error in factual finding established – manifest excess not established – leave to appeal granted – appeal dismissed

Legislation Cited:
Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW)
Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW)
Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW)

Cases Cited:
AB v The Queen (1999) 198 CLR 111; [1999] HCA 46
Aktar v The Queen [2015] NSWCCA 123; (2015) 251 A Crim R 376
Amante v R [2020] NSWCCA 34
Baines v R [2016] NSWCCA 132
Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1; [2010] NSWCCA 194
Geraghty v R [2023] NSWCCA 47
Hili v The Queen (2010) 242 CLR 520; [2010] HCA 45
Jalloh v R [2009] NSWCCA 295
Jiang v R [2010] NSWCCA 277
Kentwell v The Queen (2014) 252 CLR 601; [2014] HCA 37
Lowndes v The Queen (1999) 195 CLR 665; [1999] HCA 29
Moodie v The Queen [2020] NSWCCA 160; (2020) 284 A Crim R 87
R v Harris [2015] NSWCCA 81; (2015) 70 MVR 412
R v Qin [2008] NSWCCA 189
Salmond v R [2010] NSWCCA 141
Sharma v R [2010] NSWCCA 338
Smith v R [2020] NSWCCA 181; (2020) 93 MVR 345 Taitoko v R [2020] NSWCCA 43
Wong v The Queen (2001) 207 CLR 584; [2001] HCA 64
Wright v R [2019] NSWCCA 134

Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Rakesh Singh Rawat (Applicant)
Rex (Respondent)
Representation:
Counsel:
A Norrie (Applicant)
V Garrity (Respondent)
Solicitors:
Sydney Criminal Law Specialists (Applicant)
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (NSW) (Respondent)

File Number(s): 2022/00083469
Publication restriction: Nil
Decision under appeal

Court or tribunal:

District Court of NSW

Jurisdiction:

Criminal

Citation:

[2023] NSWDC 589

Date of Decision:

22 August 2023

Before:

Haesler SC DCJ

File Number(s):

2022/00083469

HEADNOTE

[This headnote is not to be read as part of the judgment]

The applicant, Rakesh Rawat, sought leave to appeal from the sentence imposed on him in respect of one count of sexual touching, contrary to s 61KC(a) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) to which he pleaded guilty. The offence committed by the applicant involved him pulling down…

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 Rawat v The King

Details

AGLC: Rawat v The King [2024] NSWCCA 64
Case: [2024] NSWCCA 64
Decision Date: 08 May 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Rawat v The King, the appellant was convicted of one count of sexual touching. The appeal against sentence was heard by the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia. The central issue in this appeal was whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive. The appellant contended that the sentencing judge erred in finding that he had a lack of understanding of issues relating to consent, and that an Intensive Corrective Order (ICO) was technically available but would not sufficiently serve the purposes of sentencing, particularly in terms of victim vindication, retribution and general deterrence.

The court examined the sentencing judge's findings regarding the appellant's understanding of consent and found no error in these factual determinations. The Full Court also considered whether the sentence was manifestly excessive. It noted that while an ICO was technically available, the sentencing judge had properly considered the purposes of sentencing and determined that an ICO would not be appropriate. The court held that the appellant had not demonstrated any error in the sentencing judge's approach or the sentence imposed. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and leave to appeal to the High Court was granted.

Orders