R v Karan Singh and Ors [2025] EWCA Crim 785
- Elicia Maxwell
- 2 days ago
- 5 min read
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Appeal from Crown Court at Basildon , Judge Graham
Date of judgement : 20th June 2025
Parties:
Appellant : Regina
Defendant : Singh , Orogun , Ayanleye , Ladeaga , Aidoo , Adepoju
Charges:
Count one: In possession of a firearm with intent to endanger life.
In the prosecution case Singh and Orogun were involved in a conspiracy to possess at least one firearm with intent to endanger life. Involvement in shooting of Jombola 18/11/2023 , messages exchanged, and taking the firearm to enemy territory.
Count two: Conspiracy to possess at least one firearm with intention to cause fear or violence.
All six offenders were involved in a conspiracy to possess a firearm. This was demonstrated in evidence by the group ride out to Cherry Orchard Estate 25/10/2023 , shooting of Jombola, and firing of weapons in videos, and use of firearms. 20/11/2023.
Facts of the case:
Possession of firearm and intention to endanger life:
October to November 2023 members of the WoolyO gang based in South East London obtained a handgun with live ammunition. During this period they used it with intent to endanger life (Singh and Orogun) and cause fear of violence (Ayaleye and Aidoo) to members of another gang.
Involvement in planned activity : ride out on the Cherry Orchard estate , shooting on the estate , a robbery near a safe house rented , and videos found on Singh phone plus messages threatening further gun violence.
25/10/2023 moped carrying two offenders were seen to chase another male down a road onto Cherry Orchard Estate. Two gunshots were heard. Recorded by CCTV at a local shop footage. The police had recovered two live bullets.
18/11/2023 police were called to Queen Elizabeth's hospital in Woolwich. Jordan Jombola had a bullet wound to his shoulder. He was shot in his car on the Cherry Orchard Estate. Crown case he was shot at by the offenders.
20/11/2023 suspected robbery in Aveley, proposed transaction to sell mobile phones has gone wrong as cash was stolen by two men wielding a firearm. Recovered two bullets which had live ammunition.
20/11/2023 firearms had been used to threaten violence during a robbery incident.
21/11/2023 Aidoo was in possession of a Rambo knife, £820 cash and a balaclava. He was arrested on suspicion of robbery.
The possession of a Springfield XD semi automatic firearm as a pool weapon was jointly possessed by the group.
Perverting the course of justice:
Shahid Khan provided detailed statements 30/11/2023 explaining the background of the 20/11/2023 incident.
He was forced to hand over cash by two men armed with a knife and handgun. He withdrew his support for a prosecution.
Basis of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice that Singh, Orogun and Adepoju encouraged his lack of cooperation with the police by offering to pay him £4000 and Rolex watch.
15/02/2024 offenders set up fake Snapchat accounts using the username Shahid in order to create a fake evidence trial.
Orogun did this until 18/04/2024.
Previous Ruling:
28/03/2025 at Crown Court Basildon six defendants were charged and sentenced for firearm offences.
Orogun and Singh convicted for conspiracy to possess a firearm with intent to endanger life
Orogun 14 years imprisonment
Singh 8 years detention
Other 4 defendants pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess a firearm with intention to abuse fear of violence
Ayanleye 5 years imprisonment
Ladeaga 4 and half years imprisonment
Aidoo 4 years detention
Adepoju 3 years imprisonment
Orogun, Singh and Adepoju received 1 year consecutive sentences on charge of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice
Categorisation of firearm offences:
Possession of firearm with intent to endanger life (s16 Firearms Act 1968 and possession of firearm with intent to cause fear of violence s16.A ) have a familiar grading of culpability and harm. The judge found the injury to Jombola constitutes serious harm and substantive offences were category 2A. The starting point for possession of a firearm with intent to endanger life is 14 years custody with a range from 11-17 years. Possession with intent to cause fear of violence starting point is 6 years with a range 4-8 years.
Issues raised on appeal:
Ms Husbands, Solicitor general, court is unduly lenient
Gang rivalry incidents, creating a grave risk to the general public and discharging live ammunition on rival territory. Use of firearms to threaten others.
Presence of aggravating factors no uplift was applied
Regard to minimum terms in sentencing the offences on conspiracy charges
Consecutive sentence considered for Aidoo for having a bladed article
Insufficient weight was given to the conspiracy to pervert the course of justice
Argument of Appellant:
The seriousness of gun crime was emphasised by Lord Judge CJ “the gravity of gun crime cannot be exaggerated. Guns kill and maim, terrorise and intimidate”.
The starting point of 14 years adopted by the judge was the same guideline for a single offence of possession of firearms with intent to endanger life. Conspiracy in the case covers at least 3 incidents and conduct lasting a month. It should have a higher starting point.
The court said the purpose of Section 36 Criminal Justice Act 1988 is the avoidance of gross error, unduly lenient sentences and preservation of public confidence.
Argument of Defendant:
Mr Furlong on behalf of Orogun - An increase over the guideline figure within section 16 offence simply because conspiracy has been indicted is not appropriate. High culpability is evidenced through: sophisticated nature of offence, significant planning, leading role in group activity, prolonged incident. There is no evidence that the offenders have discharged a firearm in a public place other than one occasion. Therefore, the standard requirements of high culpability have not been met.
In response to this submission, the judges were in agreement for not altering Singh and Orogun's sentencing outcomes.
(31) “we consider that figure of 14 years, while perhaps on the lenient side, did not involve a gross error nor was it outside the range of sentences which a reasonable judge might properly impose” regarding Orogun.
(33) “we consider this to have been on the lenient side but not outside the range of sentences open to a reasonable trial judge” regarding Singh.
In Attorney General Reference, Lord Lane CJ proposed that “this court may only increase sentences which it concludes were unduly lenient”
Judgement:
The court granted the solicitor general application for leave.
Ladeaga 5 years.
Aidoo 5 years for possession of firearm and 9 months for possession of a bladed article charge.
Sentences for Orogun, Singh, Ayanleye and Adepoju remain unaltered.
Ratio Decidendi:
Parliament has laid out a defendant 18 or more committing a substantive offence of possession of firearm with intent to cause fear of violence must receive a custodial sentence of at least five years.
Ladeaga - did not hold the sentence as being unduly lenient.
Ayanleye - “in his case this was a lenient sentence but we are not satisfied that it crosses the threshold for an unduly lenient sentence” (37)
Aidoo - (39) sentence ruled as unduly lenient, but will remain serving a concurrent sentence.
Adepoju - His sentence has not been altered.
Conclusion:
This ruling highlights the importance of judges considering whether an increase in sentencing is just for all parties involved. The judges must consider whether an increase or reduction in sentences for defendants would be ‘unduly lenient’. This case is a reminder that in individual cases it must be given consideration as to whether a sentence is altered.
Bibliography:
R v Karan Singh and Ors [2025] EWCA Crim 785 (2)
Attorney General's Ref no. 43 (Bennett and Wilkinson) [2009] EWCA Crim 1925
Attorney General’s Ref no. 132 [2002] EWCA Crim 1418
Attorney-General's Reference (No. 4 of 1989) (1989) 11 Cr. App. R. (S.) 517
Firearms Act 1968
Sentencing Act 2020
Comments