Ontario Review Board
Re: Suneet Ahlawat
ORB File No: 7190
Hearing held on: Friday, November 14, 2025
Place of hearing: Centre for Addiction and Mental Health 1001 Queen Street West, Toronto
Pursuant to: Section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Ms. S. Kert Members: Dr. J. Kis Dr. J. C. Rose Mr. J. Goldenberg Mr. A. Mete
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Suneet Ahlawat Counsel: Mr. D. Brodsky
The person in charge of hospital: Representative: Dr. P. Darby
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Mr. C. Coughlan
REASONS FOR DISPOSITION
(Dated December 8, 2025)
Overview
On August 3, 2017, Suneet Ahlawat was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (NCR) on Criminal Code charges of sexual assault (x2), assault and threatening death. Mr. Ahlawat’s most recent disposition (dated November 13, 2024) is a conditional discharge, including conditions requiring him to abstain absolutely from the non-medical use of drugs and alcohol and, on his consent, take medication and treatment as prescribed by his psychiatrist or directed by the person in charge of CAMH or their designate, among other conditions.
On November 14, 2025, this panel of the Ontario Review Board met at CAMH (the hospital) for Mr. Ahlawat’s annual hearing under s. 672.81 of the Criminal Code. Mr. Ahlawat was present and represented by his counsel, Mr. Brodsky. Dr. Darby represented CAMH and provided evidence as Mr. Ahlawat’s attending psychiatrist. Mr. Coughlan appeared for the Crown.
The issues to be decided are whether Mr. Ahlawat is a significant threat and, if so, what disposition is necessary and appropriate, considering the four factors in s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code.
At the conclusion of the hearing, the position of CAMH and the Crown was that the test for significant threat continues to be met, and that with the removal of the consent to treatment condition, the current conditional discharge is the necessary and appropriate disposition.
Mr. Ahlawat’s position was that he no longer poses a significant threat to public safety and should receive an absolute discharge. If the Board finds that the test for significant threat is met, Mr. Ahlawat agreed with CAMH and the Crown regarding the proposed disposition.
After hearing the evidence, considering the relevant caselaw and deliberating, we find that Mr. Ahlawat continues to meet the threshold test of posing a significant threat to the safety of the public, and that his current conditional discharge, with the removal of the consent to treatment condition, is the necessary and appropriate disposition. These are our reasons.
Background and Index Offences
Mr. Ahlawat was 36 years old at the time of the hearing. He was born in India but from the age of eight, he and his sister lived with their aunt and paternal grandmother in Edmonton. Mr. Ahlawat finished high school and attended university, completing a program in applied biomolecular science with a minor in psychology in 2011. He worked at a health lab in Alberta for 11 months before moving to Toronto to be closer to his sister.
Mr. Ahlawat began smoking cannabis at the age of 14 and consumed up to seven grams a week while at university. His psychiatric history, much of which correlates with his substance use history, dates from 2013 when he was seen for help with what he identified as depression. In 2015 he had three admissions to hospital, once presenting in a state of acute psychosis after using large amounts of marijuana for a prolonged period prior to admission, and another in a state of mania with notable sexual disinhibition. His third admission in early September 2015, only days after his prior discharge, occurred after he was using marijuana and became depressed.
As part of his discharge plan, Mr. Ahlawat’s sister arranged for him to return to India, receive treatment and live with their mother. He returned to Canada in March 2016, lived at Seaton House (a men’s shelter) and continued to smoke marijuana. On January 20, 2017, he was taken to the Toronto Western Hospital for assessment after announcing in a bar that he wanted to kill himself.
All of the index offences took place while Mr. Ahlawat was in hospital in January 2017. While being assessed in the Emergency Department at Toronto Western, Mr. Ahlawat became aggressive, punching one nurse, grabbing the breast of another and making a verbal threat. He was transferred to the Toronto General Hospital and admitted to the psychiatric unit there. A week later, while he remained on the same unit, Mr. Ahlawat entered the room of a female co-patient. He was totally nude at the time. As the female patient sat up on her bed, Mr. Ahlawat grabbed her by the throat, pushed her head down on the bed, lay on top of her and began kissing her cheek. When she yelled for help, Mr. Ahlawat walked out and returned to his room. The victim sustained a bruise to her throat and soreness to her neck.
When subsequently discussing his index offences, Mr. Ahlawat attributed his actions to his being actively psychotic. He reported hearing voices and receiving messages from God, in addition to thinking he could read others’ minds. He reported heavy use of cannabis in the period leading up to his becoming psychotic and stated it took approximately three months after his last use of cannabis for his symptoms to abate, despite receiving treatment with antipsychotic medication during that period.
After being found NCR in August 2017, Mr. Ahlawat was admitted to CAMH. He remained an inpatient until February 2020, when he was discharged to supervised housing at THRP-1 and came under the care of the CAMH Forensic Outpatient Service (FOPS).
In late June 2020, Mr. Ahlawat was readmitted to CAMH following a period of escalating substance use (alcohol and cocaine), duplicitous behaviour including suspected urine drug screen tampering) and clinical instability. The view of his FOPS team was that Mr. Ahlawat required a contained setting to externally enforce his abstinence. His substance use was noted to be “a significant factor in his sexual and violent reoffending risk, both due to its destabilizing effects on his major mental illness, and also the disinhibiting and judgment impairing effect it had on his underlying coercive sexual preference.” (hospital report, p.23) He was discharged back to his high support housing after a two month period of stabilization.
In the early hours of May 28, 2021, Mr. Ahlawat approached housing staff at his residence to advise that he was experiencing symptoms of psychosis and requested to go to hospital. He reported using cannabis earlier in the evening, which resulted in the sudden emergence of auditory and visual hallucinations. He was taken by ambulance to St. Joseph’s Health Centre and admitted voluntarily overnight. The next day he was taken to CAMH, where he was admitted and stabilized over the next few days. During that admission, he advised that he had used cannabis due to feelings of anxiety.
Thereafter, Mr. Ahlawat’s return to the community was marked by ongoing concerns of clinical instability and a decline in his therapeutic engagement with his treatment providers. His UDS results, while negative, were dilute and of questionable validity. As the summer progressed he presented as more irritable, tense and struggling in his functioning. After being confronted by CAMH staff in mid-August 2021, Mr. Ahlawat eventually admitted that he had been using cocaine on a monthly basis since April 2021, had been regularly tampering with his UDS samples over the same period, and had also smoked cannabis. He expressed remorse for his sustained deception and a commitment to abstinence. His UDS frequency was increased with additional monitoring to reduce his ability to tamper with samples. A nightly curfew was also imposed on him at his residence.
In late September 2021, Mr. Ahlawat presented to the emergency department at CAMH for admission in the context of increased and unmanageable cocaine cravings. The FOPS suggested a longer admission to establish and implement a more robust relapse prevention plan. During the admission, Mr. Ahlawat took the recommended steps of connecting with a weekly virtual Cocaine Anonymous group (a goal he had repeatedly deferred while in the community) and a virtual CMHA substance group. He was discharged back to his community residence after a monthlong admission.
Since that time, Mr. Ahlawat has not required readmission to hospital. In July 2023, he moved into an independent one-bedroom apartment subsidized by CMHA, where he continues to live. He independently manages his oral medications, which are supplied in a blister pack. He is also adherent with his injectable medication. At times he has exhibited some tendency towards disengagement from the team and externalization when frustrated or stressed, but this has steadily decreased over recent reporting years. Though largely abstinent, Mr. Ahlawat has used cannabis on some occasions, as detailed below.
Mr. Ahlawat’s current diagnoses are schizophrenia, substance use disorder and paraphilia – rule out paraphilic disorder (coercive, non-consenting preference).
Course Since the Last Hearing
At Mr. Ahlawat’s last annual hearing, Dr. Meng (his then attending psychiatrist) testified that Mr. Ahlawat had not exhibited any overt psychosis or mood symptoms over the prior reporting year. While Mr. Ahlawat did inform his case manager that he had used cannabis twice in early May 2024 to manage his ongoing poor sleep, there was no evidence of emergent psychosis. The view of the treatment team was that Mr. Ahlawat’s more sustained periods of abstinence from substances and more constructive coping mechanisms influenced his improved clinical stability.
Dr. Meng also emphasized that Mr. Ahlawat needed to be involved in more structured and productive activities, as without these he tends to disengage from care and become more listless, resulting in substance use. He can also become despondent with his situation. These negative attitudes tend to spiral and impact his mental status. Dr. Meng suggested that Mr. Ahlawat needed a productive routine and that this could be achieved by him obtaining employment or engaging in educational activities.
At the current hearing we received the evidence of CAMH in the form of an updated hospital report and the oral testimony of Dr. Darby, who has been Mr. Ahlawat’s treating psychiatrist for the last six months. That evidence revealed as follows: Overall, the clinical year was a good one for Mr. Ahlawat. He is adherent with medication (both oral and injectable) which is controlling his symptoms, and his mental status is generally stable. He has been active in going to the gym, a local community centre and the library, and has been attending weekly Cocaine Anonymous meetings. He is in frequent contact with his mom in India and has a number of friends with whom he socializes. Recently he has been working bussing tables in a restaurant.
Dr. Darby advised that a major concern for the treatment team over the coming year is Mr. Ahlawat’s potential substance use and the destabilizing effects of substance use on his mental state. Mr. Ahlawat has signed up for a lab technician course at a college just outside of the GTA and, assuming he is accepted into the program (he has an interview in next week) he will likely experience stress around his return to an academic setting. Dr. Darby described Mr. Ahlawat’s significant history of cannabis and substance use associated with his significant mental decompensation. He also noted Mr. Ahlawat’s disclosure that he used cannabis once this reporting year (when he experienced cravings), the positive UDS for cannabis that followed, and Mr. Ahlawat’s minimization of his substance use in the last couple of years.
Dr. Darby also advised that in the month before the hearing Mr. Ahlawat had asked about having the marijuana prohibition removed from his disposition. The treatment team discussed the possibility of removing the term, but given Mr. Ahlawat’s extensive history of cannabis use, including around the time of the index offences, the team believes the prohibition should continue. As described by Dr. Darby, the view of the clinical team is that given Mr. Ahlawat’s history and the “very clear” link between his substance use and decompensation, any use of cannabis is an unacceptable risk for Mr. Ahlawat. The plan of the clinical team over the next year would be to work with Mr. Ahlawat to help him develop deeper insight into his use of substances, including the possibility of 1:1 meetings with an addiction specialist or other counselling, depending on Mr. Ahlawat’s availability.
In response to questions, Dr. Darby addressed the consent to treatment condition in Mr. Ahlawat’s current disposition. He said that Mr. Ahlawat has always been compliant with treatment and that he did not believe that the condition adds much in terms of ensuring his ongoing compliance.
Mr. Ahlawat also testified. When asked about the statement in the hospital report that he had indicated “he would like to be able to use cannabis,” Mr. Ahlawat’s response was somewhat unclear. However, he seemed to indicate that as a result of an earlier discussion with Dr. Meng he believed it would be helpful for him to have the prohibition removed from his disposition to prove he could remain abstinent (particularly in respect of cocaine) without the prohibition.
Positions of the Parties, Analysis and Conclusions
In submissions, Mr. Brodsky noted Mr. Ahlawat’s general success in the community, particularly over the last two years while subject to a conditional discharge disposition. He said that despite a couple of “slip ups” to substance use, Mr. Ahlawat has been prepared to engage with the clinical team to address these slips. He has also been employed, is pursuing his education and has addressed some of the concerns about structuring his time raised by the treatment team last year. Mr. Brodsky said that the treatment team likes his client and is concerned about what might happen if Mr. Ahlawat uses drugs and decompensates, but that the hospital is being overly cautious about letting him go and it is time for the Board to give Mr. Ahlawat an absolute discharge.
We agree that Mr. Ahlawat has made progress over the past number of years. Since his discharge back to the community in the fall of 2021, he has demonstrated improved clinical stability. He has not required readmission to hospital and continues to live in an independent apartment. He has been adherent with medication and shows reasonable insight into his illness and his need for medication going forward. Over the course of the past year he has become involved in more productive and structured activities, as suggested by Dr. Meng last year. We recognize that all of these are positive developments and that Mr. Ahlawat is on a positive trajectory.
However, we share the concern of the treatment team and the hospital around Mr. Ahlawat’s potential return to substance use over the next year, absent a disposition. As outlined in the hospital report, Mr. Ahlawat has a significant polysubstance use history (notably cannabis and cocaine) “to the detriment of his mental state.” Prior to his admission to hospital in January 2017, he used cannabis regularly and this likely contributed to him becoming actively psychotic around the time of the index offences. It was in this psychotic and disinhibited state that he committed the index offences, including a serious sexual assault on a vulnerable co-patient.
Similarly, in 2020 and 2021, Mr. Ahlawat repeatedly engaged in cocaine and cannabis use, resulting in him experiencing a decline in his mental state, “with evidence of transient psychotic exacerbation and affective behavioural instability.” This occurred while Mr. Ahlawat was adherent with medication. In other words, there is good evidence that Mr. Ahlawat’s use of substances either triggers his psychosis or is a significant contributing factor to the reemergence of his psychosis. When actively psychotic, Mr. Ahlawat has the potential for acting out in a sexually aggressive manner, especially given an underlying interest in coercive sexual activity.
One of Mr. Ahlawat’s primary triggers to substance use is his reaction to stress and anxiety. When experiencing stress at university, he was a heavy user of cannabis. His relapse to cocaine and alcohol use in May/June 2020 occurred in the context of him experiencing ongoing stress around his job, and he provided a similar explanation for his relapse to cocaine and cannabis use in May 2021. Although he has indicated his intention to abstain from the use of cannabis, and despite being aware of the prohibition in his disposition, Mr. Ahlawat used cannabis in 2024 (when experiencing poor sleep and some “energy pressure” in his head) and in 2025, albeit on a very limited basis.
Mr. Ahlawat’s more recent cannabis use did not result in the emergence of psychotic symptoms. However, substance use remains one of Mr. Ahlawat’s major risk factors for reoffending, and it is not clear that he is internally motivated to remain abstinent. As described by Dr. Darby, Mr. Ahlawat does not have a true understanding of how risky substance use is overall for him, and he continues to overestimate his coping abilities when faced with interpersonal or other significant stressors. While we recognize that Mr. Ahlawat has done well while living in the community, we accept that if he returns to school this year in a program that is challenging and requires hard work (as anticipated), there is a real risk of Mr. Ahlawat reverting to maladaptive coping strategies, including the use of cannabis, particularly absent any clinical oversight and assistance such as that provided under a disposition. Given the potential risks associated with Mr. Ahlawat’s return to substance use, in our view the test for significant threat continues to be met.
Having found significant threat, we agree with the parties that the risk posed by Mr. Ahlawat can continue to be managed under the current conditional discharge disposition, with the removal of the consent to treatment clause. Section 672.55 of the Criminal Code directs that a Review Board disposition cannot include a condition requiring that an NCR accused take psychiatric or other treatment unless the accused consents to such a condition and the Review Board considers it to be reasonable and in the interests of the accused. Based on the evidence of Dr. Darby, and noting Mr. Ahlawat’s good compliance with medication for many years, we agree with the parties that the condition is no longer necessary in this case.
In the result, taking into consideration public safety (which is paramount), as well as Mr. Ahlawat’s mental condition, reintegration into society and other needs, we find that the necessary and appropriate disposition, which is also the least onerous and least restrictive in the circumstances, is one discharging Mr. Ahlawat on conditions as set out above.
DATED this 8th day of December 2025, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Ms. S. Kert Alternate Chairperson Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board