R v Shahnur Rahman

An application to extend time and renew an application for leave to appeal against sentence should be refused where the proposed grounds disclose no arguable sentencing error. A sentencing judge who presided over the trial is well placed to assess the circumstances of the offending. An appellate court will not interfere where the judge was entitled to characterise a prolonged, persistent joint attack as high culpability and a revenge attack, properly assessed aggravating and mitigating features, and imposed sentences that were not arguably manifestly excessive.

Shahnur Rahman and Ridwanur Rahman were convicted at Lewes Crown Court of attempting to cause grievous bodily harm with intent after a group attack on a former employee of their family restaurant. The Recorder sentenced Shahnur to four years’ imprisonment and Ridwanur to three years and nine months’ imprisonment.

After the Single Judge refused leave, each applicant, acting in person, sought an extension of time to renew an application for leave to appeal against sentence. They challenged the categorisation of culpability, the findings of abuse of power and revenge, and the treatment of mitigation. Ridwanur also challenged the finding of a racial element.

1. The applications for extensions of time and for leave to appeal against sentence were refused. None of the proposed grounds was arguable.

2. The Recorder was entitled to treat the offending as Culpability A and Category 3 harm under the relevant Sentencing Council Guideline. The attack was prolonged and persistent. It followed the earlier confrontation at the restaurant, involved the pursuit of the complainant, and was properly characterised as a revenge attack.

3. The Recorder, having presided over the trial, was well placed to assess the circumstances. There was no arguable error in identifying abuse of power. In Ridwanur’s case, the use of a racial insult supported the finding of a racist element.

4. The Recorder had carefully balanced the aggravating features against mitigation, including the applicants’ good character and favourable references. The one-fifth reduction for an attempt was appropriate despite the serious injury caused. The resulting sentences were not arguably manifestly excessive.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): The applicants’ late renewed applications for leave to appeal against sentence were refused: [2025] EWCA Crim 616.
• Single Judge: Leave to appeal against sentence was refused.
• Crown Court at Lewes: On 2 October 2023, each applicant was convicted of attempting to cause grievous bodily harm with intent. On 8 November 2023, Shahnur was sentenced to four years’ imprisonment and Ridwanur to three years and nine months’ imprisonment.