R v Waqqas Amin Raja & Anor

A defendant’s police interview which contains both inculpatory and exculpatory statements is evidence of the facts stated throughout, although the jury may take account of its having been neither sworn nor tested in cross-examination. A misdirection on that point will not make a conviction unsafe where the summing-up otherwise fairly presents the defence case and compelling independent evidence makes the error immaterial.

A jury may be asked to continue deliberating after reporting difficulty, provided the judge does not exert pressure or imply that a verdict must be reached. A sentencing court must apply the guideline in force when sentence is passed. Delay may mitigate, but does not require a substantial reduction where it causes no significant detriment and the offence itself warrants a severe sentence.

Raja was convicted at a retrial in the Crown Court at Isleworth of causing death by dangerous driving and causing serious injury by dangerous driving. His Porsche had travelled at high speed with a convoy of high-performance vehicles shortly before Idrak’s BMW struck the victims’ car. Raja renewed his application for leave to appeal against conviction, contending that the judge had wrongly directed the jury on his police interview and had improperly allowed deliberations to continue after jury notes indicated difficulty in reaching verdicts.

Idrak had pleaded guilty at the Central Criminal Court to corresponding offences arising from the same collision. He renewed his application for leave to appeal against his sentence of nine years and nine months’ imprisonment. He contended that delay after his guilty pleas, and the change in the applicable sentencing guideline, required a substantially greater reduction.

1. Both renewed applications for leave to appeal were refused. Raja’s convictions were not arguably unsafe, and Idrak’s sentence was neither arguably manifestly excessive nor wrong in principle.

2. The judge’s written direction on Raja’s police interview was erroneous. Where an interview contains both inculpatory and exculpatory remarks, the whole statement is evidence, subject to the caveat that it was not made or tested on oath. That approach was established by R v Greenhalgh [2014] EWCA Crim 2084.

   The error was immaterial. In the later oral summing-up, the judge directed the jury to have regard to Raja’s account when assessing the defence case and fairly summarised its inculpatory and exculpatory features. The jury also had the interview transcript. CCTV evidence independently and compellingly showed Raja driving at dangerous speed, joining the convoy and competing for position. It undermined his account and the defence inference from his silence at trial.

3. The judge’s decision to allow the jury to continue deliberating did not pressure them into reaching verdicts. By acknowledging their earlier note and confirming it was not ignored, she avoided any suggestion of reproach or an instruction that verdicts had to be reached. Nothing indicated that a juror had been induced to abandon a genuinely held view.

4. The sentencing judge was bound to apply the guideline in force when Idrak was sentenced, rather than the earlier guideline in force when he offended. She was entitled to treat delay as only modest mitigation. It had caused no significant detrimental effect, and Idrak’s later conduct did not demonstrate remorse.

5. The notional sentence of 13 years properly reflected sustained racing, grossly excessive speed, deliberate dangerous manoeuvres, the grave injury caused, the use of false number plates, and other aggravating features. Even under the former guideline, a sentence close to the applicable maximum would have been warranted because of the seriousness of the offending.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) — Raja’s renewed application for leave to appeal against conviction and Idrak’s renewed application for leave to appeal against sentence were refused.
• Crown Court at Isleworth — Raja was convicted after retrial on 6 November 2023. On 15 February 2024, both applicants were sentenced for causing death by dangerous driving and causing serious injury by dangerous driving.
• Central Criminal Court — Idrak pleaded guilty on 19 January 2022 to causing death by dangerous driving and causing serious injury by dangerous driving.