Shankar Ramalingam v The Queen

The applicant, Shankar Ramalingam, appealed to the Court of Criminal Appeal of Western Australia against his conviction for the offence of dangerous driving occasioning death. The dispute concerned the applicant's contention that the trial judge erred in law by failing to direct the jury on the alternative offence of dangerous driving.

The central legal issue before the Court of Criminal Appeal was whether the trial judge was obliged to leave the lesser charge of dangerous driving to the jury, notwithstanding that the applicant had been convicted of the more serious charge of dangerous driving occasioning death. This required the Court to consider the circumstances in which a judge must direct a jury on an alternative offence, particularly where the evidence might support a finding of guilt on that lesser charge.

The Court of Criminal Appeal reasoned that a judge is only required to direct the jury on an alternative offence if there is a rational view of the evidence that would permit a jury to acquit on the principal charge but convict on the alternative. In this instance, the Court found that the evidence presented at trial did not permit such a rational view. The evidence, if accepted, established that the driving was dangerous and that this dangerous driving caused the death. Therefore, there was no evidentiary basis upon which the jury could have found the applicant guilty of dangerous driving but not guilty of dangerous driving occasioning death. The appeal was accordingly dismissed.