R v Mahek Bukhari & Ors

In sentencing for murder or unlawful act manslaughter, statutory aggravating and mitigating factors must be evaluated by judgment rather than applied mechanically. Youth and immaturity may require substantial downward weight, particularly where the offender is under 25. In secondary-party unlawful act manslaughter, liability requires participation in an agreement to commit, or intentional assistance or encouragement of, a criminal offence. Agreement to, or assistance in, conduct which is merely obviously dangerous is insufficient. The base offence must be identified and proved.

Eight defendants were retried in the Crown Court at Leicester for the murders or manslaughters of two men killed during a high-speed pursuit. Four defendants were convicted of murder, three of manslaughter and one was acquitted. Four defendants brought live applications or appeals before the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division).

One appellant challenged a murder minimum term. Three renewed applications for leave to appeal against manslaughter convictions, principally alleging defective directions concerning secondary participation and the base offence. The same three challenged their sentences. The central issues were whether the manslaughter directions disclosed an arguable legal error and whether the sentences properly balanced culpability, aggravation and mitigation.

1. The appeal against Mahek Bukhari’s murder minimum term was allowed. The starting point of 30 years under Schedule 21 to the Sentencing Act 2020 was correct, but the sentencing judge placed excessive weight on planning and gave insufficient weight to youth and immaturity. Her role as a social media influencer added nothing to the assessment of culpability. The minimum term was quashed and replaced by 28 years, less four months for qualifying curfew and 332 days on remand, producing 26 years and 285 days.

2. The three renewed applications for leave to appeal against manslaughter conviction were granted on the ground concerning the route to verdict. In unlawful act manslaughter, a base crime must be identified and proved. A secondary party cannot be guilty unless he or she was party to an agreement to commit, or intentionally assisted or encouraged, a criminal offence. Agreement to conduct which is merely obviously dangerous is insufficient. The court applied the principle in R v Jogee [2017] AC 387. The route to verdict arguably allowed conviction without identifying the base offence or its mental element.

3. The applications on the no-case and inconsistent-verdict grounds were refused. There was evidence capable of supporting a finding that each appellant remained a party to a joint enterprise to cause at least some harm. Material distinctions existed between their cases and that of the acquitted defendant, and differing verdicts were open to the jury.

4. The manslaughter sentence appeals were allowed. Category B culpability was available because the car chase carried a high risk of death or really serious harm which ought to have been obvious. However, the appellants’ minor roles required powerful downward weight. Their youth, good character and other mitigation also carried real weight. Aggravation from failing to assist, covering up evidence and the existence of weapons had to be balanced without an overly mechanistic approach; the weapons were not used. Totality required an uplift for two deaths, but the sentences remained manifestly excessive. The substituted sentences were 13 years for Ameer Jamal, less four months; 13 years for Sanaf Gulammustafa, less three months; and 10 years for Natasha Akhtar, less four months.

• Crown Court at Leicester: following retrial, convictions were recorded on 4 August 2023 and sentences imposed on 1 September 2023 by HHJ Spencer KC.
• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): the court granted leave to appeal against the manslaughter convictions on one ground, allowed the sentence appeals, substituted reduced sentences and refused the remaining renewed applications.