R. v. Sharma Date:, 2013 BCPC 379

Citation: R. v. Sharma Date: 20131218 2013 BCPC 0379 File Nos: 199715-3-KC, 200314-1-K, 200314-2-KA Registry: Surrey IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA REGINA v. NEERAJ NARENDRA SHARMA ORAL REASONS FOR SENTENCE OF THE HONOURABLE JUDGE M.B. HICKS Counsel for the Crown: W. Sayson, Q.C. Counsel for the Defendant: M. Sandhu Place of Hearing: Surrey , B.C.

Dates of Hearing: November 13, December 13, 2013 Date of Judgment: December 18, 2013 [ 1 ] THE COURT : Neeraj Narendra Sharma has pled guilty to six offences covered on three Informations, and is before the court today to be sentenced. On Information 200314-1-K, he has pled guilty to the single count that on May 28th, 2013, he assaulted N.S. On Information 199715-3-KC, an Information proceeded by indictment, on Count 1 he pled guilty to the assault of N.S. on June 4th, 2013.

On Count 3 he has pled guilty to assault causing bodily harm to N.S. on June 6th, 2013, and on Count 6 on the same date in the same circumstances, he assaulted L.R. On Information 200314-2-KA he has pled guilty to two counts of breaching the recognizance on which he had been released in respect to the assault of N.S. committed May 28th, 2013.

On Count 1 he violated the condition that he not attend the residence at (address) in Surrey, and on Count 3, that he consumed alcohol, contrary to the recognizance. [ 2 ] The Crown seeks a global sentence in the 18-month to three-year range, less time in custody pre-sentence. The Crown says such a sentence is required to denounce the significant violence the accused inflicted on the victim, and to deter him and others from such violent acts arising in the context of a relationship, and to reflect the fact the offences were committed in the face of protective court orders.

The Crown seeks a three-year probation order if a sentence in the provincial range is imposed, together with ancillary DNA and firearms orders. [ 3 ] Mr. Sandhu, on behalf of this offender, acknowledges the seriousness of these offences and the aggravating factors noted, but says the time spent in custody to date, totalling six months and 17 days since the events of June 6, 2013, has had a substantial deterrent effect. He says a proper balancing of sentencing objectives would now give increased weight to rehabilitative factors.

He argues for a global sentence not to exceed 18 months, less time in custody pre-sentence. The defence does not oppose the probation order and ancillary orders proposed. [ 4 ] Mr. Sharma's prior adult criminal history is as follows: On July 5, 2010 on a charge of uttering threats he was conditionally discharged subject to completing a six-month probation order. On February 24th of 2011, he received an eight-month conditional sentence order and a one-year probation order for possession of a controlled substance for trafficking purposes.

On January 31, 2013 in respect of an assault against the same complainant committed in September of 2013, he received a suspended sentence and was placed on a one-year probation order. That probation order included a no contact condition with this victim. He was bound by that order when he committed the offences that are before this court. [ 5 ] The circumstances of the offences are the following: On May 28th, 2013, Mr. Sharma and the victim were at his mother's residence. He was consuming drugs and alcohol on a daily basis and had done so that day.

He was yelling at the victim and telling her to get out, and calling her a bitch. His mother and sister called the police. The victim told police Mr. Sharma hit her after she refused to get him more liquor. Bruises were observed on both of her shoulders. During the arrest, he was verbally abusive to the victim, his mother, his sister and to the police. He spit in the face of the victim in the presence of the police. He was flailing and kicking inside the police car. The victim would not cooperate further with police. [ 6 ] Mr.

Sharma was released on a recognizance with no contact conditions respecting the victim, his mother and sister, no attendance at their homes, and that he not consume alcohol. He was now, at that point, bound by court-ordered protective conditions respecting the victim set out in the prior probation order and now this recognizance. [ 7 ] The victim had been in an earlier relationship with a person named H.P., also known as R., who lived in the same block or very near to Mr. Sharma's family home. On June 4th of 2013, the victim went to lunch with R. Mr. Sharma and R. exchanged text messages, and Mr.

Sharma then picked up the victim. An argument ensued about her contact with R. Mr. Sharma struck the victim in the face, causing her nose to bleed. He continued to drive about. He told her to close the window and put the seat back down so that she could not be seen. He hit her as she spoke. He took her cell phone and identification. [ 8 ] On June 6th of 2013, the parties consumed alcohol and drugs. They rented a room at the Days Inn at 13373 King George Boulevard, Surrey. The security video of the front desk and lobby area depicts the violent nature of the assault Mr.

Sharma committed on the victim in that area on that date. The video shows the victim at the front desk. The manager, L.R., was behind the desk. Mr. Sharma came into the lobby area. He is much larger than the victim. He grabbed hold of the victim and began to drag her from the lobby area by the hair. She resisted. As L.R. tried to intervene, Mr. Sharma warned her off and then shoved her away, thereby assaulting her.

He then administered a ferocious beating to the victim, which included blows, soccer-style kicks to the head as she lay on the ground, and blows administered using a stomping motion with his foot to the head of the victim. Police and emergency services attended, by which point Mr. Sharma had left. He was later arrested at his mother's home and has been in custody since that time. By attending at his mother's home on that date, he violated his recognizance. [ 9 ] The victim was able to say that her boyfriend was responsible. She then became unconscious. She was badly injured.

She suffered major facial injuries, particularly to her mouth and nose. Her condition is graphically evident in the photograph of her face taken soon after the assault. Her head is in a brace at that point. Her face is bloody, swollen and bruised, both eyes are black and closed.

Despite the severe beating, the victim recovered without apparent permanent injury. [ 10 ] The breach offences arise from the consumption of alcohol and, as I indicated, from his arrest at his mother's home where he was not permitted to be. [ 11 ] I have had the benefit of a comprehensive pre-sentence report and psychological assessment prepared by Dr. Karen Whittemore. Mr. Sharma is 28 years of age; he was just shy of his 28th birthday when these offences were committed. He grew up in a violent home where his father subjected him, his sister and his mother to severe physical abuse. When Mr.

Sharma was 13 his father suffered a debilitating stroke. He was unable to work and required complete care at home. The family's financial circumstances suffered. These circumstances had their effect on Mr. Sharma. He fell into drug and alcohol abuse, dysfunctional relationships, and criminal activity. Alcohol and drug abuse became entrenched. He was unable to develop a stable work history or supportive

relationships. These circumstances have been interrupted from time to time where he was able to remain clean and sober for periods, but relapses have occurred. He has completed Grade 11 and subsequently completed the GED program. He is employable when he is clean. [ 12 ] Family members report a history of violent behaviour, including violence directed towards them. Nonetheless, Mr. Sharma's mother and his sister, who were in court on the day submissions were heard, support him, and I believe they are both present in court here today.

They continue to support him through continuing contact; however, they seek an order that he not be permitted to return to their home once he is released on probation, should that occur. Their continued support will be important, in my view, during the rehabilitation program that will follow. [ 13 ] The pre-sentence report asserts that Mr. Sharma benefits from a structured and controlled environment. He has benefitted from the abstinence enforced in custody since his arrest. He did not, however, complete the Respectful Relationships Program which began in April of 2013.

He has not attended substance abuse management programming. The pre-sentence report writer asserts that he would benefit from a more intensive level of programming to address violence and substance use in the federal system. [ 14 ] Mr. Sharma assumed full responsibility for his actions when speaking with the writer of the pre-sentence report. [ 15 ] The psychological assessment provided substantial detail about his anger and the violence, family abuse and substance abuse in Mr. Sharma's background building on the themes outlined in the pre-sentence report.

That assessment identified issues of depression which require Mr. Sharma's engagement with professional services and which he has not done intensively to date. [ 16 ] Dr. Whittemore concluded that if Mr. Sharma did not engage with recommendations to address a series of risk factors that I have referred to, he presents a high risk of future intimate partner violence. Alcohol and drug use disinhibit his temper and he is not yet equipped to control his anger. Violence will follow. Dr. Whittemore provides recommendations to assist Mr.

Sharma in managing his risk which address his violence, his substance abuse, and relationship issues, as well as unresolved childhood issues relating to his father, as well as protective measures and close monitoring. Reports note Mr .Sharma is willing to participate in the programs to address these recommendations. [ 17 ] I note here that N.S. does not wish there to be any protective conditions once Mr. Sharma is released. She wishes to re-engage with him. She was present in court on the day submissions were heard, and I believe she is here again today.

She has not filed a victim impact statement. [ 18 ] Defence counsel has pointed out that Mr. Sharma's father died in January 2013, and just seven days later his grandfather died. Despite his father's violence and then his years of severe disability, Mr. Sharma has struggled over this loss and has unresolved issues respecting his background which were aggravated by this death and then the loss of his grandfather so shortly after. Without minimizing its seriousness, Mr. Sandhu argues that I should view Mr.

Sharma's offending over a relatively short period of time in the light of these traumatic events. [ 19 ] Crown counsel has provided a collection of authoritative statements from superior courts in Canada about the need to deter and denounce relationship violence in strong terms through the sentencing process in order to protect people, often women, in abusive relationships who are often at a significant physical disadvantage, as is the case here, but who are also, beyond physical control, in circumstances in which a significant imbalance in power exists.

Offences which occur in these relationships, and in this case we are speaking of offences of significant violence, are matters of concern to the entire community. In those circumstances the court must act to prevent that violence, and that will require a court to impose protective conditions in appropriate circumstances, despite the apparent objection of the victim, at least until the court can be satisfied that the risk factors have been addressed sufficiently that it is safe to loosen those conditions. [ 20 ] I have considered the mitigating factors in Mr.

Sharma's acceptance of responsibility and determination to address the issues which he must, but I must also consider, in light of his history and his disregard of protective court orders, a strong statement which, to the extent the sentencing regime can do so, works to deter him in the future, and others, and which denounces this conduct in strong terms. Mr.

Sharma's rehabilitation may be underway following six months of pre-sentence custody, but the issues that he must overcome will continue to require his full attention for some time into the future, and which can only be addressed through the involvement of professionals as recommended in the reports. That rehabilitation must commence and continue at this time in a custodial setting. [ 21 ] I conclude an appropriate global sentence to be in the range of 30 months' incarceration, less pre-sentence custody.

I impose the following sentence: On Information 200314-1-K, on Count 1, the assault on May 28th, 2013, I impose a two-month jail sentence. [ 22 ] On Information 199715-3-KC, on Count 1, that is the assault on June the 4th of 2013, I impose a sentence of four months consecutive. On Count 3, the assault causing bodily harm on the 6th of June, 2013, an appropriate sentence would be 24 months incarceration. I give credit for six months and seven days. I impose a further sentence therefore of 17 months consecutive to each of the previous sentences.

On Count 5, that is the assault on June 6th of 2013 of L.R., I impose a two-month concurrent sentence to Count 3. [ 23 ] On Information 200314-2-KA, Counts 1 and 3, those are the breaches of the recognizance, I impose sentences on each of two months, to be served concurrent with the earlier sentences. That is, in effect, a total of 23 months of additional time to be served by Mr.

Sharma, followed by a three-year probation order. [ 24 ] The conditions are generally going to be the ones that are set out in the pre-sentence report, which I understand are supported by Crown counsel, and I will review those now. [ 25 ] You are to keep the peace and be of good behaviour. [ 26 ] You shall report in person to the probation officer nearest your releasing institution immediately upon your release, and thereafter as and when directed by the probation officer.

[ 27 ] You will reside in a residence approved in advance by your probation officer, and you will not change that residence without the prior written permission of the probation officer.

Such residence may include residential treatment programs, if so consented and directed. [ 28 ] You are prohibited from owning, possessing or carrying any weapons as defined in the Criminal Code , or any knives, except while preparing and consuming food, or at a workplace for the purpose of employment. [ 29 ] You shall attend, participate in and successfully complete any assessment, counselling or program as directed by the probation officer.

Without limiting the general nature of this condition, such assessment, counselling or program may include and relate to substance abuse prevention, psychiatric and psychological health, and relationship violence prevention. [ 30 ] You shall not possess or consume any alcohol or controlled substances as defined in the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act , excluding prescription medication prescribed to you by a physician or dentist. [ 31 ] You shall not enter any liquor store, beer and wine store, pub, bar, lounge or other business premise where the primary commodity sold is liquor. [ 32 ] You are not to be found outside of your residence between the hours of 9:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m., seven days a week, except with the prior written permission of the probation officer.

You are to present yourself at the door of your residence to any peace officer who attends your residence to determine your compliance with any condition in this order. [ 33 ] You shall have no contact, directly or indirectly, with N.S., L.R., H.P., also known as R.P. You shall not attend within a 100- metre radius of the residence, educational facility or workplace of N.S., L.R. or H.P., also known as R.P. [ 34 ] You shall not attend within a 100-metre radius of the Days Inn located at 13373 King George Boulevard, Surrey, British Columbia.

You are not to attend within a two-block radius of (address), Surrey, British Columbia. [ 35 ] You will take reasonable steps to maintain yourself in such condition that your mental health issues will not likely cause you to conduct yourself in a manner dangerous to yourself or anyone else, and it is not likely that you will commit further offences. [ 36 ] At the direction of your probation officer you will attend from time to time upon your treating physician or any other doctor at a mental health clinic for the purpose of receiving such medical counselling and treatment as may be recommended, except that you shall not be required to submit to any treatment or medication to which you do not consent.

If you do not consent to the form of medical treatment or medication prescribed or recommended, you shall so notify your probation officer. [ 37 ] You shall provide your treating physician with a copy of this order and the name, address and telephone number of your probation officer. You shall instruct your treating physician that if you fail to take medication as prescribed by him or her, or fail to keep appointments with him or her, he or she is to so advise your probation officer immediately. [ 38 ] Those are the conditions, Mr.

Sharma, that will apply on the probation order. [ 39 ] I am going to order that you supply a sample of your DNA to the National DNA Databank as the assault causing bodily harm offence, I believe, is a primary designated offence, and that will occur during the course of your incarceration. [ 40 ] There will be a lifetime firearms prohibition order under s. 109 of the Criminal Code . [ 41 ] I am going to waive the surcharges. [ 42 ] I will direct that the pre-sentence report and the psychological assessment accompany the Warrant of Remand to the institution so that they are available for counselling considerations there, and programming, and also that they be made available to the probation officer once the probation period is underway. [ 43 ] MR.

SAYSON: Could you please impose the number 3 item on the ancillary orders, the non-communication order with N.S.? [ 44 ] THE COURT: Yes. There will be an order that will apply during your custodial period that you have no contact, directly or indirectly, and you must not communicate, directly or indirectly, with N.S. That order is in effect. [ 45 ] MR. SAYSON: That is pursuant to s. 743.2(1). And with respect to Information 199715-3-KC, there will be a stay of proceedings on Counts 2, 4 and 6. On Information 200314-2-KA, a stay of proceedings on Count 2. (REASONS FOR SENTENCE CONCLUDED)