Sanghera & Anor v R

A trial judge may direct that jurors receive defence statements only where the statutory condition is met and must exercise the resulting discretion reasonably. Defence statements are not evidence. A conviction will not be unsafe merely because jurors have encountered inadmissible material where clear and adequate directions enable them to consider only admissible evidence.

A secondary party is guilty of murder where, while participating in a joint enterprise, he foresees a real risk that the principal may intentionally kill or cause really serious injury in carrying out the enterprise, and the principal kills with that intent. A purported change in the immediate target of continuing violence does not create a separate plan where the evidence shows one continuing incident.

Following a seven-week trial before Jack J at Birmingham Crown Court, Sanghera and Takhar were convicted of the murder of Swinder Singh Batth, who was killed by a single gunshot outside a sports bar. Sanghera was alleged to have fired the shot. Takhar was alleged to have recruited him and to have participated in a joint enterprise involving a gun.

Sanghera challenged rulings concerning defence statements, severance, allegedly inadmissible material and a handwritten note. Takhar challenged the jury directions on secondary liability and evidence, and appealed his 29-year minimum term. The central issues were whether the convictions were unsafe and whether the minimum term was wrong in principle or manifestly excessive.

1. All appeals were dismissed. The court upheld both convictions and dismissed Takhar’s appeal against his 29-year minimum term.

2. Under section 6E of the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996, the judge had reasonably concluded that supplying the defence statements would assist the jury in a complex multi-defendant trial. The editing power concerned references to matters whose evidence would be inadmissible; it did not convert the statements themselves into evidence. Although it would have been preferable to remove the statements before deliberations, the judge’s direction that they were not evidence and should not be consulted prevented any resulting unfairness.

3. The refusal to sever Sanghera’s trial or discharge the jury was upheld. Joint trials are the norm for defendants charged from the same central facts, and separate trials are appropriate only in very exceptional circumstances. The judge was entitled to rely on clear directions distinguishing evidence admissible against Sanghera from material admissible only against co-defendants.

4. Assuming that Sanghera’s handwritten note was a confession for section 76A of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, its admission was proper. The evidence showed a mutually advantageous arrangement between Sanghera and Takhar, rather than conduct likely to render Sanghera’s statement unreliable. The court was satisfied that the statutory condition for admitting it would have been proved on the balance of probabilities.

5. Takhar’s joint-enterprise direction was correct. Applying R v Powell [1999] 1 AC 1, R v Rahman [2009] AC 129, and R v Gnango [2011] UKSC 59, the court held that the evidence supported one continuing plan to confront and use violence against those connected with the laser incident. The absence of Kieron Wynter and Takhar’s subsequent argument with Craig Martin did not create a distinct plan outside the scope of the enterprise.

6. Takhar’s prior convictions were aggravating under section 143(2) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003. His leadership, planning and recruitment of an armed gunman justified a minimum term longer than Sanghera’s. The 29-year term properly balanced the aggravating and mitigating factors and was neither wrong in principle nor manifestly excessive.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) — dismissed Sanghera’s and Takhar’s appeals against conviction, and dismissed Takhar’s appeal against his minimum term: [2012] EWCA Crim 16.
• Birmingham Crown Court, Jack J — on 5 August 2010 convicted both appellants of murder and imposed life sentences, with minimum terms of 28 years for Sanghera and 29 years for Takhar, less time spent on remand.