R v Kamaljit Singh Chahal & Anor

In sentencing a drug-supply conspiracy, the guideline for substantive supply is relevant but does not directly govern. Harm must be assessed by reference to the criminal enterprise as a whole, including intended or foreseeable future dealings and the likely continuation of the conspiracy until police intervention. The quantity personally handled is less significant. For a highly commercial operation involving quantities far beyond Category 1, a sentence above 20 years may be justified, subject to totality and proportionality. An appellate court will not interfere with a sentencing assessment made on detailed facts unless there is an error of principle or the sentence is manifestly excessive.

The applicants pleaded guilty in the Crown Court at Leicester to conspiracies to supply cocaine, heroin and cannabis. The conspiracies were uncovered through Operation Venetic. The organised crime group supplied large quantities of drugs and moved more than £1.6 million connected with drug supply.

On 14 June 2023, the Recorder sentenced Kamaljit Chahal, the leader of the group, to 18 years’ imprisonment, and Bhipon Chahal, his subordinate, to 15 years’ imprisonment. Both renewed applications for leave to appeal against sentence after the single judge had refused leave.

The central questions were whether the sentencing judge adopted an excessive starting point, gave excessive weight to the additional conspiracies, and adequately reflected the applicants’ roles and mitigation.

Disposition

The court refused both renewed applications for leave to appeal against sentence. The sentences of 18 years’ and 15 years’ imprisonment respectively were not arguably manifestly excessive.

1. The guideline for supply of a controlled drug was a proper starting point, but did not directly govern sentencing for conspiracy. A conspirator supports the whole enterprise. Harm therefore includes actual, intended and foreseeable quantities, including dealings likely to occur had the police not ended the conspiracy.

2. The Recorder was entitled to treat the conspiracy as operating on an exceptionally serious commercial scale. The recorded quantities covered only 14 weeks of a conspiracy lasting more than 30 weeks. The evidence justified the conclusion that substantially greater quantities were dealt with, or intended to be dealt with, and that the operation would have continued. A 23-year notional sentence after trial for the leading role in the cocaine conspiracy was therefore within the proper sentencing range.

3. The court endorsed the need for judgment rather than a strictly arithmetical exercise in cases involving quantities far beyond the top guideline category. Sentences should normally not exceed 30 years save in exceptional circumstances, which necessarily creates some crowding or bunching among exceptionally serious cases. The Court of Appeal would be slow to interfere with a judge who had detailed knowledge of the case, absent error of principle.

4. The three-year uplift to reflect the heroin and cannabis conspiracies complied with the Sentencing Council Guideline on Totality and was, if anything, lenient. It properly reflected the additional offending rather than heroin alone. The further one-year aggravation for Kamaljit Chahal’s recent relevant conviction was modest.

5. For Bhipon Chahal, the Recorder was entitled to assess his role as involving important leading functions, while making reductions for his subordinate position, youth, lack of convictions, withdrawal from the conspiracy and other mitigation. The judge had made sufficient allowance for those matters. Neither sentence was unjust or disproportionate.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): renewed applications for leave to appeal against sentence refused: [2024] EWCA Crim 466.
• Crown Court at Leicester: on 14 June 2023, Kamaljit Chahal was sentenced to 18 years’ imprisonment and Bhipon Chahal to 15 years’ imprisonment following guilty pleas to three drug-supply conspiracies.
• Single judge: initially refused leave to appeal against sentence.