Yasin & Ors, R. v [2026] EWCA Crim 68 (21 January 2026)

Yasin & Ors, R. v [2026] EWCA Crim 68 (21 January 2026)

There was ample evidence for the jury to conclude that C2 had not given free and informed consent to sexual activity with Yasin, given her vulnerability, grooming, and the circumstances; the judge was right to leave the issue to the jury. The evidence was sufficient for conviction on count 25. Sentences imposed on Amar and Saddiq were not manifestly excessive and were within guideline ranges. The restraining orders against Amar and Ajaib were not shown to be necessary and are quashed.

Citation
[2026] EWCA Crim 68
Parties
Prosecution: Rex; Applicant/appellant: Tahir Yasin; Appellant: Mohammed Amar; Appellant: Yaser Ajaib; Applicant/appellant: Abid Saddiq
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 January 2026
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Yasin: renewed application for leave to appeal against conviction refused; Amar: appeal against sentence dismissed, restraining order quashed; Ajaib: appeal against sentence withdrawn, restraining order quashed; Saddiq: renewed application for leave to appeal against sentence refused.
Legal Topics
Sexual Offences, Consent, Grooming, Sentencing, Restraining Orders, Appeals
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Consent Grooming Sentencing Restraining Orders Appeals

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Prosecution

Tahir Yasin

Applicant/appellant

Mohammed Amar

Appellant

Yaser Ajaib

Appellant

Abid Saddiq

Applicant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the jury could properly convict Yasin of rape given the evidence of consent and identity on count 25
  2. 2 Whether the sentences imposed on Amar, Ajaib, and Saddiq were manifestly excessive or wrong in principle
  3. 3 Whether restraining orders against Amar and Ajaib were necessary

Ratio Decidendi

There was ample evidence for the jury to conclude that C2 had not given free and informed consent to sexual activity with Yasin, given her vulnerability, grooming, and the circumstances; the judge was right to leave the issue to the jury. The evidence was sufficient for conviction on count 25. Sentences imposed on Amar and Saddiq were not manifestly excessive and were within guideline ranges. The restraining orders against Amar and Ajaib were not shown to be necessary and are quashed.

Court Disposition

Yasin: renewed application for leave to appeal against conviction refused; Amar: appeal against sentence dismissed, restraining order quashed; Ajaib: appeal against sentence withdrawn, restraining order quashed; Saddiq: renewed application for leave to appeal against sentence refused.

Orders

  • Restraining orders against Amar and Ajaib quashed
  • All other appeals and applications dismissed or refused