Court of Appeal overturns convictions in domestic violence case

Introduction

The Court of Appeal has overturned the convictions of Asgar Sheikh, Shabnam Sheikh, Khalid Sheikh, and Shagufa Sheikh, who were previously found guilty of causing or allowing a vulnerable adult to suffer serious physical harm under section 5 of the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004 (DVCVA). The judgment, delivered by Lady Justice Macur, focused on the interpretation of the statute and the evidence presented at trial.

Background

The appellants were convicted in December 2023 for their involvement in the severe harm suffered by Ambreen Sheikh, who was left in a persistent vegetative state. The case revolved around the statutory interpretation of section 5 of the DVCVA, particularly subsections 5(1)(c) and (d). The appellants argued that the trial judge, Mrs Justice Lambert, erred in her interpretation, leading to their convictions.

The Legislative Framework

Section 5 of the DVCVA criminalises causing or allowing a child or vulnerable adult to suffer serious physical harm. The statute requires that the defendant was aware of a significant risk of harm and failed to take reasonable steps to prevent it. The appeal centred on whether the appellants could have foreseen the specific unlawful act that led to Ambreen's condition.

Key Arguments

The appellants contended that the trial judge misapplied the statute by not adequately considering the differences between the initial injury to Ambreen and the subsequent harm. They argued that the statute's language required a more precise connection between the known risk and the eventual harm.

Court's Analysis

The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge's interpretation of the statute was too broad. The court emphasised that the circumstances leading to the harm must be of a kind that the defendant could foresee. The judges concluded that the administration of glimepiride, which allegedly caused the harm, was too dissimilar from the initial injury to be reasonably foreseeable by the appellants.

Impact on Shagufa Sheikh

A separate argument was made on behalf of Shagufa Sheikh, whose mental capacity was a significant factor. The court acknowledged her limited intellectual capacity but determined that it was a matter for the jury to decide whether she could have taken reasonable steps to prevent the harm.

Conclusion

The Court of Appeal's decision highlights the importance of precise statutory interpretation in criminal cases. The ruling underscores the need for clear evidence linking the defendant's awareness of a risk to the specific harm that occurred. The convictions were quashed, and the appellants were acquitted of the charges under section 5 of the DVCVA.

Learn More

For more information on domestic violence laws and their application, see BeCivil's guide to UK Domestic Violence Law.

Copyright & permissions