Tarjit Singh v R

Tarjit Singh v R

The appellant's gender dysphoria and personality disorders did not reduce culpability as there was no sufficient connection between the disorders and the offending behaviour; the sentence was not manifestly excessive; findings of vulnerability, planning, and dangerousness were open to the trial judge; only the statutory surcharge was unlawful and quashed.

Parties
Appellant: Tarjit Singh; Respondent: Rex
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 July 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part, dismissed in part
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Assault by Penetration, Gender Dysphoria, Dangerousness, Mitigation, Fresh Evidence
Criminal Law Sentencing Assault by Penetration Gender Dysphoria Dangerousness Mitigation Fresh Evidence

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tarjit Singh

Appellant

Rex

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence was manifestly excessive given the appellant's gender dysphoria and mental disorders
  2. 2 Whether fresh evidence should be admitted
  3. 3 Whether the judge failed to reflect the impact of acquittals

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant's gender dysphoria and personality disorders did not reduce culpability as there was no sufficient connection between the disorders and the offending behaviour; the sentence was not manifestly excessive; findings of vulnerability, planning, and dangerousness were open to the trial judge; only the statutory surcharge was unlawful and quashed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part, dismissed in part

Orders

  • Statutory surcharge quashed
  • Appeal against sentence otherwise dismissed