R v JPH (CR 96/2020) [2021] SCSC 836 (12 January 2021)

R v JPH (CR 96/2020) [2021] SCSC 836 (12 January 2021)

The court found that the seriousness of the offences, the risk of interference with the virtual complainant (who is the Respondent's daughter and has been threatened), and the need to protect the complainant outweigh the Respondent's right to bail. Remand is justified to prevent obstruction of justice and protect witnesses.

Citation
[2021] SCSC 836
Parties
Applicant: Republic; Respondent: J. PH
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Seychelles
Judgment Date
12 January 2021
Case Number
CR 96/2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Application for Remand Pending Trial
Outcome
Application for remand allowed; Respondent remanded to custody.
Legal Topics
Remand, Bail, Sexual Offences, Protection of Witnesses
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Remand Bail Sexual Offences Protection of Witnesses

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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Republic

Applicant

J. PH

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Application for Remand Pending Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Respondent should be remanded in custody pending trial
  2. 2 Whether the seriousness of the offences and risk of interference with witnesses justify denial of bail

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the seriousness of the offences, the risk of interference with the virtual complainant (who is the Respondent's daughter and has been threatened), and the need to protect the complainant outweigh the Respondent's right to bail. Remand is justified to prevent obstruction of justice and protect witnesses.

Court Disposition

Application for remand allowed; Respondent remanded to custody.

Orders

  • Respondent is remanded to custody pending further order of the court.