NSW Caselaw
Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Singh v R [2015] NSWCCA 257 Hearing dates: 14 October 2015 Date of orders: 14 October 2015 Decision date: 08 June 2016 Before: Macfarlan JA Decision: Orders as follows made on 14 October 2015:
That the applicant be released on the following conditions, namely that:
(i) he appear at the Liverpool Local Court on 21 October 2015 and thereafter as may be required; (ii) he reside at 7 Phillip Street, Liverpool; (iii) he not be absent from 7 Phillip Street, Liverpool between the hours of 8 pm and 6 am; (iv) one acceptable person, namely Ravenna Singh, deposit the sum of $2,000.00 and agree to forfeit that amount in the event that the applicant fails to appear in accordance with his bail undertaking; (v) he present himself at the front door of 7 Phillip Street Liverpool upon being directed to do so by any police officer to confirm compliance with his curfew, such direction to only be given by a police officer who believes on reasonable grounds that it is necessary to do so, having regard to the rights of other occupants of the premises to peace and privacy; (vi) he not approach directly or indirectly, except through his legal advisers, Rayane Gobindram or any other person whom he is notified will be called in the proceedings against him; (vii) he surrender his passport to the officer in charge of the investigation prior to entering bail; and (vii) he not apply for any new passport or travel document. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – bail – first application for release refused – bail granted on second application – material change in circumstances due to charges being downgraded – bail concerns addressed by imposition of conditions Legislation Cited: Bail Act 2013 (NSW) Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Cases Cited: Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) v Tony Mawad [2015] NSWCCA 227 Direction of Public Prosecutions (NSW) v Tikomaimaleya [2015] NSWCA 83 R v Kugor [2015] NSWCCA 14 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Brendon Singh - Applicant Representation: Counsel: R Rodger – Applicant Mr P Ingram SC – Respondent
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate