JOGA SINGH FROM SYSTON SENTENCED IN LEICESTER FOR DECADES-OLD SEX CRIMES

In February 2014, a man named Joga Singh, who was once regarded as a respected figure within the community of Leicester, faced a significant legal setback when his prison sentence was reduced following an appeal. Singh, a resident of Simpson Close in Syston, had originally been sentenced to nine-and-a-half years at Leicester Crown Court in June of the previous year after admitting to two serious sexual offenses committed over three decades earlier.

Singh's criminal acts dated back to the late 1970s, when he was just 17 years old. The offences involved luring an eight-year-old boy into a private attic space and subjecting him to sexual assault. The victim, who has since come forward in his 40s, kept silent about his traumatic experience for many years. It was only after suffering persistent flashbacks and mood swings that he decided to confront Singh. During a clandestine meeting arranged with Singh, the victim secretly recorded Singh’s confessions about the crimes, which played a crucial role in the subsequent legal proceedings.

The victim, who is now in his 40s, initially sought a simple apology and a donation of £10,000 to a children’s charity. When Singh failed to fulfill these requests, the victim reported the matter to the police. Singh, who resides on Simpson Close in Syston, challenged his original sentence, claiming it was excessively harsh considering the long passage of time since the offenses occurred.

At the appeal hearing, Judge Brian Barker QC, sitting alongside Lord Justice Aikens and Mr Justice Globe, acknowledged Singh’s contributions to society prior to his criminal revelations. The court was informed that Singh had built a successful business and was regarded as a man of exemplary character before his past crimes came to light. Over 100 references attested to his community involvement, kindness, and generosity. The judge described the sentencing process as extremely challenging, balancing the severity of the offenses against the significant delay in bringing the case to court and Singh’s conduct in the intervening years.

In his judgment, Judge Barker emphasized that Singh’s crimes, committed when he was a teenager, had cast a long shadow over his life. Despite the heinous nature of the acts, the court recognized the “extreme delay” and Singh’s “exemplary” behavior since then. The appeal judge highlighted the “exceptional circumstances” that justified reducing Singh’s sentence, ultimately concluding that a six-year term would be appropriate.

Earlier, in August 2013, Singh was convicted and sentenced for the sexual abuse of the young boy. The victim, now 44, described the ordeal as a long-standing nightmare, which he had kept secret until he could no longer bear the emotional toll. He expressed disappointment that Singh did not accept responsibility sooner, stating, “Shame on him for not being man enough to accept responsibility earlier.” The victim also credited his wife and older brother for their unwavering support throughout his ordeal.

During the trial, Singh initially denied the allegations but later changed his plea to admit to the offenses after a recorded confession was verified by experts. The court heard that Singh had taken the boy upstairs to a box room in his former home in the Belgrave area, where the abuse occurred. Singh also threatened the boy with violence if he disclosed the incident.

Prosecutor Anwar Nashashibi noted that the victim had requested a letter of apology and a donation to charity, but Singh refused, prompting the victim to report the matter to the police. Defense lawyer Mary Prior described Singh as a successful businessman who had led a blameless life since the offenses, citing his childhood abuse in India as a possible explanation, though not an excuse, for his actions. She emphasized Singh’s positive reputation within the community, supported by numerous references from friends and family.

Judge Michael Pert, presiding over the case, acknowledged the lasting impact of Singh’s actions on his victim, who endured years of suffering and false accusations during the trial. The judge also noted the difficulties Singh faced in the courtroom, including being accused of lying and extortion, which added to the complexity of sentencing. Ultimately, Singh’s past crimes and his current standing in the community were weighed carefully in the court’s decision to reduce his sentence on appeal.