R v Jamil Talukder

R v Jamil Talukder

The original sentence was unduly lenient as it failed to adequately reflect the seriousness of the offending, the extreme vulnerability of the victims, the abuse of trust, and the need to weight sentences for multiple victims. The appropriate aggregate sentence, after considering aggravating and mitigating factors and totality, should be 8 years' imprisonment, achieved by imposing 4 years for each lead offence against each victim, with sentences for each victim running consecutively and other counts concurrent.

Parties
Prosecution: Rex; Respondent Offender: Jamil Talukder
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 June 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (reference by Attorney General) / Appeal Against Sentence; Review of Unduly Lenient Sentence
Outcome
Appeal allowed; sentence quashed and substituted
Legal Topics
Sexual Offences Against Children, Abuse of Trust, Sentencing Guidelines, Unduly Lenient Sentences, Concurrent and Consecutive Sentencing
Criminal Law Sentencing Sexual Offences Against Children Abuse of Trust Sentencing Guidelines Unduly Lenient Sentences Concurrent and Consecutive Sentencing

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Prosecution

Jamil Talukder

Respondent Offender

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (reference by Attorney General) / Appeal Against Sentence; Review of Unduly Lenient Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the original sentence imposed was unduly lenient
  2. 2 Proper application of sentencing guidelines for sexual offences against children
  3. 3 Appropriate categorisation and weighting of aggravating and mitigating factors

Ratio Decidendi

The original sentence was unduly lenient as it failed to adequately reflect the seriousness of the offending, the extreme vulnerability of the victims, the abuse of trust, and the need to weight sentences for multiple victims. The appropriate aggregate sentence, after considering aggravating and mitigating factors and totality, should be 8 years' imprisonment, achieved by imposing 4 years for each lead offence against each victim, with sentences for each victim running consecutively and other counts concurrent.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; sentence quashed and substituted

Orders

  • Sentences on counts 1 to 4 quashed and substituted as follows: 4 years' imprisonment on count 1, 4 years concurrent on count 2, 4 years consecutive on count 3, 4 years concurrent on count 4; aggregate sentence now 8 years' imprisonment.