Inderjit Singh Kandola

In this criminal trial on a charge under s. 88 of the Criminal Code, the central issue was whether the accused possessed a concealed machete for a peaceful purpose or for a purpose dangerous to the public peace.

The defence argued a culinary purpose tied to purchasing coconuts and sugar cane and submitted the machete was swung once in self-defence after an unprovoked punch.

The court accepted the independent civilian and police evidence, rejected key parts of the accused’s testimony as implausible and unreliable, and found the post-incident handling of the machete supported an inference of consciousness of guilt.

Applying the governing framework for s. 88 offences and the proportionality analysis under s. 34 self-defence principles, the court concluded the possession was for an offensive dangerous purpose.

The accused was convicted.

The accused was charged with impaired care or control of a motor vehicle and care or control with excess blood alcohol following a complaint of erratic driving.

A civilian witness with police experience observed the accused's vehicle weaving across lanes at excessive speeds.

Police attended the accused's residence and observed signs of impairment.

The accused was arrested and provided breath samples showing excess blood alcohol.

The accused brought a Charter application challenging the lawfulness of the arrest, detention, and search.

The court rejected all Charter arguments, finding the police conduct lawful and the evidence admissible.

The court convicted the accused on both charges based on the totality of evidence including the civilian witness observations, police observations of impairment indicators, and the breath sample results.