R v Mandip Singh Bhangal

R v Mandip Singh Bhangal

The 20-year restraining order was excessive given the duration and circumstances of the offending, the absence of further incidents, and the need for proportionality. A 10-year order is substituted as appropriate to protect the victims, including the children, as they grow up.

Parties
Appellant: Mandip Singh Bhangal; Respondent: Rex
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 July 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence (duration of Restraining Order)
Outcome
appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Racially Aggravated Harassment, Restraining Orders, Sentencing, Proportionality
Criminal Law Racially Aggravated Harassment Restraining Orders Sentencing Proportionality

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 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mandip Singh Bhangal

Appellant

Rex

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence (duration of Restraining Order)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 20-year duration of the restraining order was disproportionate to the offending and circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

The 20-year restraining order was excessive given the duration and circumstances of the offending, the absence of further incidents, and the need for proportionality. A 10-year order is substituted as appropriate to protect the victims, including the children, as they grow up.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • The 20-year restraining order is quashed and substituted with a 10-year restraining order.