R. v. Bath (S.S.), (2012) 322 B.C.A.C. 72 (CA)
| Judge | Hinkson, J.A. |
| Court | Court of Appeal (British Columbia) |
| Case Date | May 08, 2012 |
| Jurisdiction | British Columbia |
| Citations | (2012), 322 B.C.A.C. 72 (CA);2012 BCCA 221 |
R. v. Bath (S.S.) (2012), 322 B.C.A.C. 72 (CA);
549 W.A.C. 72
MLB headnote and full text
Temp. Cite: [2012] B.C.A.C. TBEd. MY.042
Regina (respondent) v. Sikander Singh Bath (appellant)
(CA039857; 2012 BCCA 221)
Indexed As: R. v. Bath (S.S.)
British Columbia Court of Appeal
Hinkson, J.A.
May 18, 2012.
Summary:
The accused was convicted of six counts of fraud and sentenced to 4.5 years' imprisonment. The accused appealed his conviction and sentence. He sought bail pending his appeals.
The British Columbia Court of Appeal, per Hinkson, J.A., allowed the application.
Criminal Law - Topic 3304
Compelling appearance, detention and release - Interim release or detention of accused pending trial or appeal - Detention necessary in the public interest - [See Criminal Law - Topic 3310 ].
Criminal Law - Topic 3304.1
Compelling appearance, detention and release - Interim release or detention of accused pending trial or appeal - Detention necessary to maintain confidence in the administration of justice - [See Criminal Law - Topic 3310 ].
Criminal Law - Topic 3310
Compelling appearance, detention and release - Interim release or detention of accused pending trial or appeal - Release pending appeal - The accused was convicted of six counts of fraud and sentenced to 4.5 years' imprisonment - He was acquitted of several other charges - The convictions related to the business activities of six "sham companies" which were alleged to have received $400,000 in refunds for GST input tax credits relating to alleged exports of lumber and shake and shingle products - The accused appealed his conviction and sentence - He sought bail pending his appeals - He had complied with pre-trial bail conditions - He suffered from medical and psychiatric conditions that allegedly required regular follow-up and close monitoring - The Crown argued that detention was necessary in the public interest and to maintain confidence in the administration of justice - The Crown's case at trial was largely circumstantial - The British Columbia Court of Appeal, per Hinkson, J.A., ordered that the accused be released on his conviction appeal on his recognizance of $75,000 without deposit together with two sureties with deposit in the total amount of $75,000, on several conditions.
Cases Noticed:
R. v. Mapara (S.) (2001), 156 B.C.A.C. 138; 255 W.A.C. 138; 45 C.R.(5th) 230; 2001 BCCA 508, refd to. [para. 16].
R. v. Mapara (S.) (2004), 199 B.C.A.C. 280; 326 W.A.C. 280; 2004 BCCA 310, refd to. [para. 24].
R. v. B.S.B. (2008), 263 B.C.A.C. 51; 443 W.A.C. 51; 2008 BCCA 483, refd to. [para. 24].
R. v. Schiel (A.K.), [2011] B.C.A.C. Uned. 58; 2011 BCCA 160, refd to. [para. 24].
Counsel:
G. Botting, for the appellant;
P. Riley, for the respondent.
This application was heard in Chambers at Vancouver, B.C., on May 8, 2012, before Hinkson, J.A., of the British Columbia Court of Appeal, who released the following reasons for judgment on May 18, 2012.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
R. v. Porisky (R.A.) et al., 2012 BCCA 309
...99, refd to. [para. 7]. R. v. B.S.B. (2008), 263 B.C.A.C. 51; 443 W.A.C. 51; 2008 BCCA 483, refd to. [para. 10]. R. v. Bath (S.S.) (2012), 322 B.C.A.C. 72; 549 W.A.C. 72; 2012 BCCA 221, refd to. [para. R. v. Mapara (S.) (2001), 156 B.C.A.C. 138; 255 W.A.C. 138; 158 C.C.C.(3d) 312; 2001 BCCA......
-
R. v. Porisky (R.A.) et al., 2012 BCCA 371
...has subsequently been referred to in R. v. Chu , 2009 BCCA 377; R. v. Schiel , 2011 BCCA 160, [2011] B.C.J. No. 598; and R. v. Bath , 2012 BCCA 221, [2012] B.C.J. No. 978. [5] This question was recently addressed before me in submissions in R. v. Gingras , 2012 BCCA 370, where I held that t......
-
R. v. Jahanrakhshan (K.A.), 2012 BCCA 341
...SCC 18, refd to. [para. 57]. R. v. Schiel (A.K.), [2011] B.C.A.C. Uned. 58; 2011 BCCA 160, refd to. [para. 66]. R. v. Bath (S.S.) (2012), 322 B.C.A.C. 72; 549 W.A.C. 72; 2012 BCCA 221, refd to. [para. K.A. Jahanrakhshan acted on his own behalf; R.R. Hira, Q.C., for the respondent. This appl......
-
R. v. Gingras (J.G.),
...not folld. [para. 22]. R. v. Schiel (A.K.) et al., [2011] B.C.A.C. Uned. 58; 2011 BCCA 160, not folld. [para. 22]. R. v. Bath (S.S.) (2012), 322 B.C.A.C. 72; 549 W.A.C. 72; 2012 BCCA 221, not folld. [para. G.D. McKinnon, Q.C., for the appellant; W.P. Riley, for the (Crown) respondent. This ......
-
R. v. Porisky (R.A.) et al., 2012 BCCA 309
...99, refd to. [para. 7]. R. v. B.S.B. (2008), 263 B.C.A.C. 51; 443 W.A.C. 51; 2008 BCCA 483, refd to. [para. 10]. R. v. Bath (S.S.) (2012), 322 B.C.A.C. 72; 549 W.A.C. 72; 2012 BCCA 221, refd to. [para. R. v. Mapara (S.) (2001), 156 B.C.A.C. 138; 255 W.A.C. 138; 158 C.C.C.(3d) 312; 2001 BCCA......
-
R. v. Porisky (R.A.) et al., 2012 BCCA 371
...has subsequently been referred to in R. v. Chu , 2009 BCCA 377; R. v. Schiel , 2011 BCCA 160, [2011] B.C.J. No. 598; and R. v. Bath , 2012 BCCA 221, [2012] B.C.J. No. 978. [5] This question was recently addressed before me in submissions in R. v. Gingras , 2012 BCCA 370, where I held that t......
-
R. v. Jahanrakhshan (K.A.), 2012 BCCA 341
...SCC 18, refd to. [para. 57]. R. v. Schiel (A.K.), [2011] B.C.A.C. Uned. 58; 2011 BCCA 160, refd to. [para. 66]. R. v. Bath (S.S.) (2012), 322 B.C.A.C. 72; 549 W.A.C. 72; 2012 BCCA 221, refd to. [para. K.A. Jahanrakhshan acted on his own behalf; R.R. Hira, Q.C., for the respondent. This appl......
-
R. v. Gingras (J.G.),
...not folld. [para. 22]. R. v. Schiel (A.K.) et al., [2011] B.C.A.C. Uned. 58; 2011 BCCA 160, not folld. [para. 22]. R. v. Bath (S.S.) (2012), 322 B.C.A.C. 72; 549 W.A.C. 72; 2012 BCCA 221, not folld. [para. G.D. McKinnon, Q.C., for the appellant; W.P. Riley, for the (Crown) respondent. This ......