Singh v R

Child abduction by a parent remains a very serious offence where it separates a child from a loving parent for years. A substantial deterrent element may be required even where the offender acted from affection for the child. Differences in the method of abduction or the known location of the child do not materially reduce the gravity where the essential harm of prolonged estrangement remains.

Steps taken after the abduction to secure a child’s return may mitigate sentence, but only to a limited extent where the offender created the circumstances requiring those steps. Sentencing credit for a guilty plea retains residual flexibility where a delayed plea resulted from seriously flawed legal advice.

The appellant pleaded guilty at Leicester Crown Court to child abduction contrary to section 1(1) of the Child Abduction Act 1984. He had taken his six-year-old daughter, X, abroad without the mother’s consent or a court order, and placed her in a boarding school in India. X and her mother had then had no contact for more than three years.

The sentencing judge imposed three years and four months’ imprisonment after allowing 25 per cent credit for the guilty plea. On appeal, the appellant challenged the four-and-a-half-year starting point and the refusal of full one-third credit. Further Family Division material was obtained to assess whether he had assisted X’s return to the jurisdiction.

Appeal allowed in part. The court substituted a sentence of three years’ imprisonment.

1. The sentencing judge was entitled to conclude that the appellant had done little to secure X’s return. The additional Family Division material did not undermine that conclusion. Even if the appellant had later attempted to secure her return, that could provide only limited mitigation because the difficulty arose from his own act of taking her abroad.

2. The starting point of four and a half years was not manifestly excessive. Regina v Kayani and another [2012] 2 Cr. App. R. (S.) 38 provided authoritative guidance that parental abduction causing prolonged estrangement is gravely cruel to both child and parent and requires a significant deterrent element. The differences relied on by the appellant did not alter the essential harm. His age and previous good character did not make the starting point excessive.

3. The court nevertheless held that the appellant should receive full one-third credit for his guilty plea. The delay in indicating the plea resulted from seriously flawed advice from his former counsel. Applying the residual flexibility recognised in Caley [2013] 2 Cr. App. R. (S.) 47, the appellant should not bear the sentencing consequence of that advice. The original sentence was therefore replaced with three years’ imprisonment.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division). Allowed the appeal to the extent of granting full one-third credit for the guilty plea, and substituted a sentence of three years’ imprisonment.
• Leicester Crown Court. The appellant pleaded guilty to child abduction and was sentenced to three years and four months’ imprisonment.