R v Saaqib Chawdhury
On the facts of this case, the acquittal of Mr Chawdhury on count 2 removed the foundation for a retrial on count 1, as both counts were factually interlinked. Seeking a retrial would be an abuse of process, and the judge was correct to stay proceedings. The prosecution's appeal was within time and jurisdiction, but the appeal fails on its merits.
- Parties
- Applicant: Rex; Respondent: Saaqib Chawdhury
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 02 December 2026
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Prosecution Application for Leave to Appeal Against a Stay of Retrial
- Outcome
- leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Abuse of Process, Autrefois Acquit, Conspiracy, Firearms Offences, Jurisdiction, Stay of Proceedings
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Rex
Applicant
Saaqib Chawdhury
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Prosecution Application for Leave to Appeal Against a Stay of Retrial
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a retrial on count 1 after acquittal on count 2 constitutes an abuse of process
- 2 Whether the prosecution's appeal was within time and jurisdiction under s.58 Criminal Justice Act 2003
Ratio Decidendi
On the facts of this case, the acquittal of Mr Chawdhury on count 2 removed the foundation for a retrial on count 1, as both counts were factually interlinked. Seeking a retrial would be an abuse of process, and the judge was correct to stay proceedings. The prosecution's appeal was within time and jurisdiction, but the appeal fails on its merits.
Court Disposition
leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed
Orders
- Mr Chawdhury is entitled to be acquitted on count 1
- Reporting restrictions on proceedings relating to Mr Chawdhury are lifted
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment