R v Deepankar Dixit

R v Deepankar Dixit

There was no arguable ground of appeal; the indictment and directions were proper; the StrongBox system was clearly used for accounting purposes; the joint enterprise direction did not affect the applicant's case; the slip of the tongue by the judge was inconsequential.

Parties
Prosecution: Rex; Applicant: Deepankar Dixit; Co Accused: Mr Siddique
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
leave to appeal refused; extension of time refused
Legal Topics
False Accounting, Joint Enterprise, Appeal Procedure
Criminal Law False Accounting Joint Enterprise Appeal Procedure

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Prosecution

Deepankar Dixit

Applicant

Mr Siddique

Co Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the indictment was defective and led to an error in directions of law
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred by including a direction on joint enterprise

Ratio Decidendi

There was no arguable ground of appeal; the indictment and directions were proper; the StrongBox system was clearly used for accounting purposes; the joint enterprise direction did not affect the applicant's case; the slip of the tongue by the judge was inconsequential.

Court Disposition

leave to appeal refused; extension of time refused

Orders

  • application for extension of time refused
  • application for leave to appeal refused