R. v. Virk

R. v. Virk

Judge accepted core parts of three complainants' accounts (Harjit, Surjit, Rajinder) and parts of the accused's own police statement as corroborative, finding beyond reasonable doubt that indecent assaults/sexual assaults occurred as charged for Counts 1–4; the judge rejected Kulbir's evidence as too inconsistent...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2018 BCSC 2409
Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Manjit Singh Virk; Complainant: Harjit Sumra; Complainant: Surjit Pooni; Complainant: Rajinder Rana; Complainant: Kulbir Pooni
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
6 April 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Prosecution Sexual Offences / Trial Judgment (verdict)
Outcome
Accused convicted on Counts 1, 2, 3 and 4; acquitted on Counts 5 and 6.
Legal Topics
Sexual Assault, Indecent Assault, Consent, Credibility Assessment, Memory Recovery, Translation of Police Statement, Application of W.(d.) Instruction
Source Language
english
Criminal Law Evidence Sexual Assault Indecent Assault Consent Credibility Assessment Memory Recovery Translation of Police Statement +1 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Manjit Singh Virk

Accused

Harjit Sumra

Complainant

Surjit Pooni

Complainant

Rajinder Rana

Complainant

Kulbir Pooni

Complainant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Prosecution Sexual Offences / Trial Judgment (verdict)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Did the accused commit sexual offences against four female relatives between 1980 and 1985?
  2. 2 Were the complainants capable of and did they consent to sexual activity (legal consent and age issues)?
  3. 3 Are the complainants' accounts credible and reliable given delays and inconsistencies?

Ratio Decidendi

Judge accepted core parts of three complainants' accounts (Harjit, Surjit, Rajinder) and parts of the accused's own police statement as corroborative, finding beyond reasonable doubt that indecent assaults/sexual assaults occurred as charged for Counts 1–4; the judge rejected Kulbir's evidence as too inconsistent and lacking corroboration and acquitted on Counts 5–6.

Court Disposition

Accused convicted on Counts 1, 2, 3 and 4; acquitted on Counts 5 and 6.

Orders

  • Count 1 (indecent assault of Harjit Sumra under s.149(1)): Guilty
  • Count 2 (indecent assault of Surjit Pooni under s.149(1)): Guilty