Singh v The Queen

Singh appealed against his conviction and sentence for offences including abduction, sexual intercourse without consent, and unlawful confinement. The appeal was heard by Murrell CJ, Burns and North JJ.

The central legal issues before the Court were whether the sentences imposed were manifestly excessive, whether the overall sentence failed to adequately reflect the principle of totality, and whether the non-parole period was correctly set, particularly in light of the parity principle.

The Court allowed the appeal, finding that the sentences were indeed manifestly excessive and that the principle of totality had not been properly applied in determining the overall length of the sentence. The Court also considered the parity principle in relation to the setting of the non-parole period. The specific orders made by the Court are detailed in paragraphs [169] to [172] of the judgment.