Verma v The Queen

The applicant, Verma, sought special leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia from a decision of the Court of Criminal Appeal of New South Wales. The Court of Criminal Appeal had dismissed Verma's appeal against his conviction for 12 offences under the *Health Insurance Act*, commonly referred to as medifraud offences. The central dispute concerned the validity of the indictment presented against Verma, which contained 21 counts.

The primary legal issue before the High Court was whether the inclusion of 21 counts in the indictment contravened section 370 of the *Crimes Act*, which governs the number of counts that may be included in an indictment. Verma argued that the indictment should not have been presented with more than three counts. This issue had been raised in the Court of Criminal Appeal as part of a broader ground of appeal concerning the trial judge's failure to direct separate trials for a number of counts.

The applicant's argument before the High Court focused on the alleged contravention of section 370 of the *Crimes Act*. The Court of Criminal Appeal had dealt with this argument by referring to existing authority from that court, which it considered itself bound by, and summarily rejected the submission. The High Court was therefore asked to determine whether this interpretation and application of section 370 was correct.