A court in the Canadian province of British Columbia Friday set aside the conviction of an Indo-Canadian man in a sexual assault case.
The sexual assault conviction had led to the imprisonment and deportation of Gurdev Singh Dhillon, which the Crown later admitted was a "miscarriage of justice".
However, the British Columbia Court of Appeal considered the DNA evidence that was not disclosed to the defence counsel before the trial and overturned the 2005 conviction of Dhillon for assault and sexual assault, the South Asian Observer reported.
However, Justice Anne MacKenzie did not acquit Dhillon.
She said that the DNA evidence would not necessarily lead to his acquittal in a new trial, but further court action "would perpetuate an injustice and undermine the integrity of our judicial system".
"In all the circumstances, I conclude (that) a new trial would constitute an abuse of process, and that a judicial stay of proceedings is the appropriate remedy," Justice MacKenzie said, citing a unanimous ruling by the three justices on the panel.
The judge however, did not award court costs to Dhillon, even though the trial ended up in the Supreme Court of Canada.
She said that while the case showed a substantial lack of attention by the Crown, there was no evidence of bad faith or malice and concluded that the non-disclosure of evidence did not amount to a marked and unacceptable departure from the reasonable standards expected of the Crown.
The allegation dates back to July 7, 2004, when a woman alleged that she was driven to a Surrey home and sexually assaulted.
She testified during the March 2005 trial that she had given birth to a child as a result of the sexual assault.
Dhillon was convicted of sexual assault and assault in October 2005 and sentenced to four years in prison in February 2006. He was released from custody in October 2008 and deported to India.
Dhillon's attorney, Paul Briggs, said that he has not yet talked to his client about the ruling.
He said that his client could now apply to return to Canada, where he was expected to take legal action.
Neil MacKenzie, a spokesman for British Colombia's Criminal Justice Branch, said the agency decided an independent review of Dhillon's conviction was in the public interest once it became aware that evidence was not given to the defence or Crown counsel during his 2005 trial or 2006 appeal.
