Jawahar Singh Padda of Surrey sentenced to 29 months in prison (Oct 19, 2019 update)

Jawahar Padda Photo: Facebook
Jawahar Padda
Photo: Facebook

UPDATE: OCTOBER 19, 2019

www.bccourts.ca/jdb-txt/ca/19/03/2019BCCA0351.htm

Summary:

The appellant appeals from a sentence of 30 months’ imprisonment imposed for one count of possessing a prohibited firearm loaded with ammunition contrary to s. 95(1) of the Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C‑46, to be served concurrently with a sentence of 18 months’ imprisonment for one count of pointing a firearm contrary to s. 87(1) of the Criminal Code. The appellant purchased a prohibited handgun and stored it at a restaurant he owned. One evening, under the influence of alcohol and cocaine, he brandished the handgun and pointed it at some of his employees. He pushed and struck an employee with his hand while in possession of the handgun. The appellant’s offending behaviour was out of character, and he was otherwise a model citizen. He purchased the handgun because he felt he needed it for protection. At the time of the offence, he was experiencing problems with alcohol and depression. After his arrest, he took significant rehabilitative steps. Held: Appeal dismissed. A 30‑month sentence is at the bottom of the range for s. 95(1) offences of a “true crime” nature. The sentencing judge understood that she could depart from the range if the appellant’s circumstances were “exceptional” so as to warrant a departure. In light of the significant aggravating factors, and considering the significant mitigating factors, including the appellant’s rehabilitative steps, she found that a sentence at the bottom of the range was appropriate. There is no basis on which to interfere with the sentencing judge’s discretion.

Justice David Harris upheld the sentence with Justices Mary Saunders and John Hunter concurring.
Under “The offences,” the ruling states: “Mr. Padda was in possession of a prohibited handgun, along with ammunition, because he had purchased it illegally for $4,000 at the end of October 2016. He felt he needed the handgun for protection at his restaurant, even though he had already hired a security firm to protect him and his employees from questionable acquaintances who had shown up late on one occasion and threatened staff.
“Just after midnight on November 1, 2016, Mr. Padda entered the kitchen of a restaurant he owns, brandishing the handgun. Several employees were present in the kitchen area. He loaded the handgun in front of his employees. He was clearly intoxicated; drunk on alcohol and he had also used cocaine. The incident, which lasted about 35 minutes, was captured by video cameras and recorded. The recordings, together with recordings from other times proximate to the incident, were exhibits on sentencing and were viewed by the judge.
“The recordings showed that Mr. Padda pointed the handgun at female employees. He gestured “as if to cock the firearm” while pointing it at his employees. At times, Mr. Padda appeared to be joking with his employees; at other times he became aggressive. He struck a female employee with his hand at least twice and pushed her while in possession of the handgun. As articulated in the reasons for sentence, the judge found that Mr. Padda, in striking and pushing his employee while armed, had “terrorized a woman that he, as her employer, was in a position of trust and authority over” … Eventually, Mr. Padda dropped the handgun after grappling with a security guard. The judge found that Mr. Padda had put his employees in grave danger.”

JAWAHAR Singh Padda, a Surrey businessman who runs a pizza joint in Newton, was sentenced to 29 months and 22 days in prison in Surrey Provincial Court on June 26, according to court documents. He also received a sentence of 18 months and both sentences will run concurrently.

Padda was charged with pointing a firearm, uttering threats, unlawful confinement, and assault in connection with an incident on November 1, 2016.
At the time, Surrey RCMP Cpl. Scotty Schumann told The VOICE that there was an argument at the place “between two people that were known to each other.” As a result of that four charges were laid.