Background
Jugraj Singh pleaded guilty to dangerous driving causing bodily harm, impaired driving causing bodily harm, and failing to comply with a breath demand after an accident causing bodily harm. On May 29, 2026, he received a global sentence of 15 months’ imprisonment, followed by three years’ probation and a three-year driving prohibition.
In October 2021, Singh ran a red light while highly intoxicated and struck another vehicle. The other driver suffered a traumatic brain injury, was unconscious for three weeks, underwent multiple surgeries including spleen removal, and continued to experience serious physical and psychological effects. Singh had no criminal record, supported his wife and young child, and faced possible deportation to India.
The Court’s Holding
Justice Trotter granted Singh leave to appeal his sentence because his proposed arguments were arguable. Singh contended that the sentencing judge treated elements of the offences as aggravating factors and improperly imposed consecutive sentences for dangerous driving causing bodily harm and impaired driving causing bodily harm.
The court nevertheless dismissed Singh’s application for bail pending appeal. For a sentence-only appeal, the applicant must show that the appeal has enough merit that detention would cause unnecessary hardship. The relevant hardship is the risk of serving more custody than the ultimately appropriate sentence, not the emotional or financial effects of incarceration on the applicant and family. Having served just over three months of a 15-month sentence, Singh had not shown that even a successful appeal would likely reduce his sentence enough to create that risk. The court ordered the appeal expedited.
Key Takeaways
- Arguable sentence-appeal grounds can justify leave to appeal without justifying release pending appeal.
- For bail pending a sentence-only appeal, “unnecessary hardship” focuses on the risk of over-serving custody.
- Personal and family hardship from incarceration does not, by itself, meet that statutory test.
Why It Matters
The decision distinguishes the threshold for leave to appeal from the more demanding test for bail pending a sentence appeal. It also underscores that an expedited appeal can reduce the concern that an appellant will remain in custody longer than a reviewing court ultimately considers appropriate.