Khan & Ors v R

Khan & Ors v R

If the plans of the Stoke and London defendants were equally serious, the risk posed to the public could not be greater from those further from realising their goal; indeterminate sentences for Stoke defendants were unjustified. Determinate extended sentences should be imposed, aligning Stoke defendants with London...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Usman Khan; Appellant: Mohibur Rahman; Appellant: Omar Sharif Latif; Appellant: Abdul Bosher Mohammed Shahjahan; Appellant: Nazam Hussain; Respondent: The Queen
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 April 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Appeals allowed in part; indeterminate sentences quashed and replaced with determinate extended sentences; appeal by Latif dismissed; Rahman's sentence reduced.
Legal Topics
Terrorism, Sentencing, Dangerousness, Extended Sentences, Imprisonment for Public Protection
Criminal Law Terrorism Sentencing Dangerousness Extended Sentences Imprisonment for Public Protection

Source-derived case record

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 6 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Usman Khan

Appellant

Mohibur Rahman

Appellant

Omar Sharif Latif

Appellant

Abdul Bosher Mohammed Shahjahan

Appellant

Nazam Hussain

Appellant

The Queen

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether indeterminate sentences for public protection were justified for Stoke defendants
  2. 2 Comparative seriousness and risk between Stoke and London defendants
  3. 3 Appropriate determinate sentences for terrorism offences

Ratio Decidendi

If the plans of the Stoke and London defendants were equally serious, the risk posed to the public could not be greater from those further from realising their goal; indeterminate sentences for Stoke defendants were unjustified. Determinate extended sentences should be imposed, aligning Stoke defendants with London defendants.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed in part; indeterminate sentences quashed and replaced with determinate extended sentences; appeal by Latif dismissed; Rahman's sentence reduced.

Orders

  • Indeterminate sentences for Khan, Shahjahan, and Hussain quashed; substituted with extended sentences: Shahjahan 22 years 8 months (17 years 8 months custodial, 5 years extension), Khan and Hussain 21 years (16 years custodial, 5 years extension)
  • Notification provisions under Counter-Terrorism Act 2008 continue for 30 years for Khan, Shahjahan, and Hussain