Court Information and Parties
Date: December 14, 2017
Information No.: 2811-998-15-34365-00
Ontario Court of Justice
Her Majesty the Queen v. Varinder Bajwa
Reasons for Sentence
Before the Honourable Justice G. Wakefield
on December 14, 2017, at Oshawa, Ontario
Appearances
I. Skelton – Counsel for the Crown
A. Ross – Counsel for Varinder Bajwa
Decision
WAKEFIELD, J. (Orally):
My difficulty is this - and frankly I will give you what I consider the alternative position first. Had the sponsorship been an absolute bar with a criminal conviction, I think that would have tipped me into a conditional discharge, notwithstanding the denunciatory and general deterrence principles of sentencing that I think are predominant in this sort of case. Had I - and I'm not, but had I granted the conditional discharge, it would have been for a three-year probationary period. It would have had weekly attendances for continued alcohol abuse counselling. It would have had those sorts of control mechanisms that would have prevented you from driving a truck, at least, well past the driving prohibition for a regular car or in other words a motor vehicle with a regular licence, because I think that that would be a factor that would fall within the community's acceptance that it was not contrary to the public interest, with those other aspects of sentencing including a fair amount of community service work, that would have given you the opportunity to put something back into the community, to help repair the damage of the risk that you put everybody at with the driving on that occasion.
The reality is, is that as I understand the advice of the wording of the application, yes, they are going to take into account, but it is not a bar outright and you will have the opportunity to have them review this particular record, and that would be a review in the context that you have no prior record whatsoever and an absolute clean driving abstract, as I understand it from counsel, other than this one day. And in all of those circumstances, I think that one day can indeed be described out of character, given the clean driving record.
However, in the circumstances here, the denunciation required for anybody with a specialized licence, which carries with it the privilege of society having a greater degree of trust in truck drivers, that in balancing all of the factors, a conditional discharge is not appropriate, with respect to being contrary to the public interest, even though it clearly is very much in your own interest. There will be a conviction on this charge.
The nature of the conviction has now taken away your livelihood. And the amount of the fine might very well be justifiable - I am actually very comfortable with the concept of a $2,500 fine. However, you have so many other obligations financially with you that I am going to reduce that, taking into account that there is the additional victim surcharge that's added to it, and the fine will be one of $2,000, but there is a victim surcharge of $600, which still brings you up to $2,600. If it's not paid, 28 days in jail is the estimated time in default.
That is a lot of funds for someone who has just lost their job, whose spouse or partner cannot contribute financially, and is hoping to add the cost of a mother as a dependent. How much time would he like to try and work that into his budget?
Sentence Imposed
- Conviction: Guilty as charged
- Fine: $2,000
- Victim Surcharge: $600
- Total Amount Due: $2,600
- Default Custody: 28 days imprisonment if fine not paid
- Driving Prohibition: As per applicable legislation
- Collateral Consequence: Loss of commercial driving privileges