Ahmed, R v

Ahmed, R v

The conviction was quashed because the indictment did not allege the actus reus of an offence under section 59 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, and the facts did not establish that the appellant supplied or procured any 'thing' as required by the statute. The statutory language does not encompass...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Ajaz Ahmed; Respondent: Regina (Crown)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 July 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeal allowed, conviction quashed
Legal Topics
Procurement of Miscarriage, Defective Indictment, Section 59 Offences Against the Person Act 1861, Abortion Act 1967, Interpretation of Statutory Language
Criminal Law Procurement of Miscarriage Defective Indictment Section 59 Offences Against the Person Act 1861 Abortion Act 1967 Interpretation of Statutory Language

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 Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ajaz Ahmed

Appellant

Regina (Crown)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the indictment properly charged an offence known to law under section 59 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861
  2. 2 Whether the facts established an offence under section 59
  3. 3 Whether the appellant's actions constituted procurement or supply of a 'thing' under section 59

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction was quashed because the indictment did not allege the actus reus of an offence under section 59 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, and the facts did not establish that the appellant supplied or procured any 'thing' as required by the statute. The statutory language does not encompass procurement of a procedure, and there was no evidence of procurement of instruments. The directions to the jury and particulars of offence did not reflect the statutory requirements.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed, conviction quashed

Orders

  • Conviction quashed
  • No order for costs from central funds