R. v. Nagra, 1994 CanLII 118 (SCC), [1994] 1 SCR 355
Harjinderpal Singh Nagra, also known as Harpal Singh Ghuman Appellant
v.
Her Majesty The Queen Respondent
Indexed as: R. v. Nagra
1994: March 15.
Present: Lamer C.J. and Sopinka, McLachlin, Iacobucci and Major JJ.
on appeal from the court of appeal for british columbia
Criminal law ‑‑ Appellate court powers ‑‑ Power to dismiss appeal against conviction where no substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice ‑‑ Conviction of conspiracy to impersonate fraudulently and of procuring passport by making false statement ‑‑ Jury not charged as to use acts and declarations of co‑conspirators could be put ‑‑ Whether Court of Appeal erred in dismissing appeal from conviction on ground that no substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice occurred ‑‑ Criminal Code, R.S.C., 1985, c. C‑46, s. 686(1)(b)(iii).
Statutes and Regulations Cited
Criminal Code, R.S.C., 1985, c. C‑46, s. 686(1)(b)(iii).
APPEAL from a judgment of the British Columbia Court of Appeal (1993), 19 W.C.B. (2d) 309, 44 W.A.C. 81, dismissing an appeal from conviction by Wetmore J. Appeal allowed.
Michael Tammen, for the appellant.
Patricia J. Donald, for the respondent.
The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by
Lamer C.J. ‑‑ We need not hear from you Mr. Tammen. We are allowing the appeal. We are of the view that we do not think this is an appropriate case in which the provisos of s. 686(1)(b)(iii) of the Criminal Code, R.S.C., 1985, c. C‑46, should have been applied.
Therefore, the appeal is allowed, the conviction is set aside and a new trial is ordered.
Judgment accordingly.
Solicitors for the appellant: Peck & Tammen, Vancouver.
Solicitor for the respondent: The Ministry of the Attorney General, Vancouver.