Malik, R. v [2025] EWCA Crim 1420 (15 October 2025)

Malik, R. v [2025] EWCA Crim 1420 (15 October 2025)

There was no abuse of process because the Bristol proceedings concerned a broader and distinct conspiracy from the Birmingham case, with different offences, dates, participants, and scope. The admission of the prior conviction was relevant and admissible. No arguable grounds of appeal arose, and the extreme delay and applicant's absconding further undermined the application.

Citation
[2025] EWCA Crim 1420
Parties
Prosecution: Rex; Applicant: Saqub Asif Malik
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 October 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal Conviction
Outcome
Applications refused
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Bad Character Evidence, Extension of Time, Conspiracy to Convert Criminal Property, Double Jeopardy
Criminal Law Abuse of Process Bad Character Evidence Extension of Time Conspiracy to Convert Criminal Property Double Jeopardy

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Prosecution

Saqub Asif Malik

Applicant

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the prosecution of the applicant in Bristol was an abuse of process given prior proceedings in Birmingham.
  2. 2 Whether the admission of the applicant's prior conviction as bad character evidence was unfair or an abuse of process.

Ratio Decidendi

There was no abuse of process because the Bristol proceedings concerned a broader and distinct conspiracy from the Birmingham case, with different offences, dates, participants, and scope. The admission of the prior conviction was relevant and admissible. No arguable grounds of appeal arose, and the extreme delay and applicant's absconding further undermined the application.

Court Disposition

Applications refused

Orders

  • Application for extension of time refused
  • Application for leave to appeal conviction refused