R v Parwana Said & Anor

In sentencing serious criminal offending, a custodial sentence may remain necessary, but accepted limitations on role, guilty pleas, good character and caring responsibilities must receive proper weight. In appropriate circumstances, responsibility for dependent children may and should attract significant weight. It is not an automatic exemption from custody. The assessment remains governed by the seriousness and circumstances of the offending. Where mitigation reduces the custodial term to 24 months, suspension may be considered. A suspended sentence may be accompanied by community requirements marking the seriousness of the offending, provided their availability and the offender’s ability to perform them are addressed.

These were sentence appeals by Parwana Said and Abdul Zahir. In March 2023, after guilty pleas to conspiracy to acquire criminal property contrary to section 1 of the Criminal Law Act and section 329(1) of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, Said received 27 months’ imprisonment and Zahir 25 months.

The sentencing judge assessed both appellants as having a category 3 lesser role. The appeals concerned the weight given to their accepted bases of plea, personal mitigation and caring responsibilities, and whether reduced custodial terms should be suspended.

1. Appeals allowed. The sentences of 27 months for Parwana Said and 25 months for Abdul Zahir were set aside.
2. The offences were serious and called for custody. However, the three-year starting point was not sufficiently reduced to reflect the accepted bases of plea, each appellant’s limited function and awareness, personal mitigation and previous good character.
3. In appropriate circumstances, mitigation arising from responsibility for dependent children may and should receive significant weight. The principle, supported by R v Petherick [2013] 1 WLR 1102, remains subject to the seriousness and circumstances of the offending and does not operate as an automatic exemption from imprisonment.
4. A custodial term of 24 months was the least custodial sentence appropriate in each case and opened the possibility of suspension. Having regard to the domestic circumstances and pre-sentence reports indicating a low likelihood of reoffending, the court suspended the sentences for the full two-year period.
5. Community requirements were appropriate to mark the seriousness of the offending. Their availability and each appellant’s ability to perform them, including Zahir’s health difficulties, had to be considered.
6. Each appellant was sentenced to two years’ imprisonment suspended for two years. Said was also required to undertake 20 rehabilitation activity requirement days and 100 hours of unpaid work. Zahir was required to undertake 100 hours of unpaid work.

1. Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): The sentence appeals were allowed. The original sentences were set aside and substituted with suspended sentences and community requirements.
2. Court below: In March 2023, following guilty pleas, the sentencing judge imposed 27 months’ imprisonment on Said and 25 months’ imprisonment on Zahir, treating both as category 3 lesser-role offenders.