R v Shah [2017] NSWDC 292

R v Shah [2017] NSWDC 292

The accused did not show cause why his detention was not justified. Although the period in custody and prospective delay were significant, the charge was serious, the Crown case was of reasonable strength, a custodial sentence was inevitable if convicted, the complainant had continuing safety concerns, the accused had a history of non-compliance with orders including alleged offending while on parole, and the Court was not satisfied he was likely to comply with lawful conditions sufficient to address the risks.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 September 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Release Application Concerning Bail for a Show Cause Offence / Application for Release Pending Further Trial After the Jury Was Discharged
Outcome
Application for release refused.
Legal Topics
['show Cause Offence' 'unacceptable Risk' 'delay Until Trial' 'domestic Violence Allegations' 'compliance With Bail Conditions']
['criminal Law' 'bail'] ['show Cause Offence' 'unacceptable Risk' 'delay Until Trial' 'domestic Violence Allegations' 'compliance With Bail Conditions']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Release Application Concerning Bail for a Show Cause Offence / Application for Release Pending Further Trial After the Jury Was Discharged

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the accused had shown cause as to why his detention was not justified under the Bail Act 2013 (NSW).' 'Whether the accused presented an unacceptable risk of committing a serious offence or endangering the safety of the complainant, individuals or the community.' 'Whether proposed conditions could reasonably and lawfully address the identified risks.']

Ratio Decidendi

The accused did not show cause why his detention was not justified. Although the period in custody and prospective delay were significant, the charge was serious, the Crown case was of reasonable strength, a custodial sentence was inevitable if convicted, the complainant had continuing safety concerns, the accused had a history of non-compliance with orders including alleged offending while on parole, and the Court was not satisfied he was likely to comply with lawful conditions sufficient to address the risks.

Court Disposition

Application for release refused.

Orders

  • ['The application for release is refused.']