Notable Cases

R v H.Z.

Client charged with domestic assaults, threats and several counts of choking. After strategic moves at trial, won the case.

R v S.A.

Client charged with various counts of sexual assault, assault and utter death threats to his x-wife. The x-wife had recordings of various of these offences. The case was in Superior Court for a judge and jury trial. Client's charges were all withdrawn in Superior Court after defence counsel strategically provided alternative evidence to what the complainant alleged, and showed that this was a set up.

R v C.P.

Client charged with 37 counts of 10 armed robberies of various pharmacies throughout the GTA. The amount of disclosure revealed was substantial. Despite that, Ms. Singh argued, though the disclosure and evidence was overwhelming, that the case was not complex. Trial was set to commence mid-January 2024. Defence brought a motion that client's constitutional right to trial within a reasonable time was breached. Defence filed over 100 pages of s. 11(b) motion material. After successful and persuasive argument by Ms. Singh, all 37 counts of robbery and possession of firearm related charges were Stayed due to the client's s. 11(b) rights being breached. 

R v M.A.

Client charged with serious charges of voyeurism. It was publicized in the media. The complainant personally provided a victim impact statement to the judge. After a successful argument by counsel Gupta, the client was absolutely discharged, despite the impact this had on the complainant. It was not in the public interest for the client to receive a conviction. 

R v C.L.

Client was a lieutenant in the Army who found himself wrongfully accused of child pornography related charges. After several unusual proceedings in court, client was exonerated of all charges.  

R v D.H.G.

Client charged with fraud charges. There were substantial pieces of evidence that points towards the client. Nevertheless, after vigorous negotiations, poking holes in the crowns case, all charges were withdrawn.

R v H.M.

Client charged with various drug trafficking charges (cocaine and fentanyl) and possession of firearm charges and discharge firearm (shooting). Police racial profiled client and arrested him on what defence proved was a wrongful arrest. Client was simply walking home in the neighborhood of a shooting that happened moments before his arrest. Police arrested him because he is a black man in the area at the time. A vehicle registered to someone else was found abandoned with the doors wide open as if the suspects ran from the car after a drive-by shooting. Police claimed client was in that car and was the shooter. Won the case after putting the puzzle pieces together proving the police just wanted to make a quick arrest fitting the evidence to match the client based on race and without any evidence to support that arrest. The investigation into client’s arrest failed to do due diligence by obtaining surveillance cameras in the area to show client was not involved. 

R v I.J.

Client charged with firearm related offences that relate to him being stopped by police, illegally questioned and searched, and then a loaded restricted firearm was found in the motor vehicle. After successful negotiations on lack of knowledge and control and Charter breaches by police, charges were withdrawn. 

R v R.C.

Client was charged with numerous firearm offences, 50 rounds of 9mm ammunition and 100 rounds of 45 caliber ammunition and drug trafficking offences including cocaine, crack cocaine, fentanyl, and cannabis as well as a significant amount of cash. Police obtained a search warrant due to a shooting that occurred. Pursuant to the search warrant, the police located a loaded handgun in the backpack alleged to belong to the client along with various drugs, ammunition and cash in the house. Pursuant to a successful Charter motion arguing a breach of the client's constitutional rights, all charges were stayed. The client, who had been on bail successfully won by counsel, continues to have no criminal record when represented by counsel. 

R v D.M.

Charges of possession of firearm related charges, proceeds and possession for the purpose of trafficking. All charges dismissed after successful constitutional argument.

R v C.M.

Charges of robbery with firearm. Successful win after Charter application due to police illegal detention and illegal search and seizure.

R v A.B.

Charges of mischief over. Charges were withdrawn after several negotiations.