Sonal Dashani

Barrister

Sonal is regularly instructed in a wide range of criminal defence work. Her current practice includes serious and complex frauds.

Sonal has extensive experience of appellate proceedings, acting on behalf of both appellant and the respondent.

She is a fearless advocate who is known for her meticulous preparation of cases. She is renowned for her client care and her ability to deal with vulnerable clients particularly through the use of intermediaries.

Sonal specialises in serious and complex fraud cases . She has substantial experience in money laundering, confiscation and enforcement proceedings and is well adept at handling cases involving large volumes of material.

As a result of her confiscation experience, she is regularly asked to assist the asset recovery unit set up in the Caribbean to train local judges and magistrates on confiscation proceedings and asset recovery.

Sonal can be instructed via the Direct Access scheme.

Articles

Apportionment in Confiscation Proceedings - the tide turns in the defendant's favour. An article on the impact of the Supreme Court judgment in the case of R v Ahmad & Others [2014] UKSC 36

Professional Associations

Criminal Bar Association
Member of the Fraud Lawyers Association
Member of the Female Fraud Forum
South Eastern Circuit

Qualifications

LLB (Hons) Brunel University

Operation Centime – Sonal as junior alone represented the second of 6 defendants charged with a Missing Intra-Community (MTIC) Fraud. This involved a sophisticated fraud involving numerous companies through which £56m had passed resulting in over £8m of VAT being evaded. Sonal’s client was said to have managed at a high level the movement of funds which were disguised using fraudulent trading documents and buffer companies. Sonal’s client was one of only 2 defendants acquitted by the jury.
Operation Hyperion – The defendant was charged alongside 12 others with a conspiracy to commit courier fraud (by a series of false representations). Elderly and vulnerable people were contacted over the telephone by males pretending to be police officers investigating crimes in relation to the victim’s bank accounts. Although convicted by the jury (the remaining defendants having entered guilty pleas after the jury had been sworn), Sonal was able to secure a suspended sentence of imprisonment for her client.
R v M – Sonal as junior alone represented a doctor charged alongside her Consultant husband with multiple counts of fraud, mortgage fraud and perverting the course of justice. A complicated and sensitive case with the value of the frauds totalling £1.1m. The case involved a significant “cut-throat” defence as between the husband and the wife with Sonal having to cross-examine the husband over 4 ½ days. Following a trial that lasted over 4 months, Sonal’s client was the only defendant to be acquitted.
Operation Bulkhead - Sonal as a led junior defended the first of five defendants in a trial spanning over 9 months, concerning allegations of Conspiracy to Cheat the Revenue involving the use of a complex film scheme where the loss to the Revenue as a result of the Fraud was over £100m.
Operation Dojo – Sonal represented the second defendant of 6 charged with the conspiracy to cheat the revenue in respect of the evasion of UK duty on the distribution and sale of smuggled tobacco.
Operation Harpseal – Sonal represented the 3^rd of 18 defendants charged with cheating the Revenue in the sum of £2.6m. This complicated case involved 46 companies set up to facilitate the fraud via fraudulent VAT claims.
R v B – Sonal led by Queen’s Counsel successfully represented a defendant charged with theft of money from Russian Oligarchs for whom he was employed. The theft was said to be in the sum of £12m. The defence made numerous legal arguments including an abuse of process argument. The Prosecution eventually offered no evidence in this case.
R v A - Sonal as junior alone represented one of 11 defendants charged with a fraud against Virgin Media involving the illicit access of the subscription television network and the use of illicit set top boxes. The value of the Fraud was estimated to be over £50m (representing the loss of revenue over the period in question).
R v B - Sonal (as a led junior) represented 1 of 4 defendants charged with money laundering of $15m (USD) which was the proceeds of a theft from a bank in Germany. The defendant solicitor was said to have laundered a proportion of the funds through complex conveyances. The defendant was acquitted following successful submissions at half time.
R v MR - Sonal successfully defended a Labour Councillor in a benefit fraud case in which the prosecution offered no evidence against her client. Sonal advised on the instruction of an expert to review the overpayment due to anomalies in the way in which the regulations had been applied. The judge agreed there was no prosecution case after the DWP admitted it had acted in error and said the defendant "could leave the Court without a stain on his character".
Operation Panga – (Ongoing) Representing a defendant charged with a courier fraud whereby elderly victims are targeted by persons over the telephone pretending to be police officers.
R v B – (Ongoing) Lead counsel representing a defendant charged alongside his wife with multiple counts of theft and Fraud relating to their supplying care services to vulnerable adults and overcharging for those services and stealing money from them.
R v A – (Ongoing) Representing a defendant charged with a Conspiracy to defraud relating to false representations alleged to have been made in respect of wine investments in a “boiler room” fraud.
Operation Zedoary – (Ongoing). Instructed to defend one of 10 defendants charged with multiple counts of conspiracy to commit identity fraud and perverting the course of justice.

Confiscation and Enforcement Proceedings

R v K - Sonal was instructed in an application to appoint a receiver as part of enforcement proceedings where there was a third party interest registered by the wife. The question of law posed for the court was whether there was a discretion in respect of interest accrued. Sonal argued that there was not. The Court agreed.
R v Z - Sonal was instructed in the High Court to respond to a case stated involving the issue of a warrant of commitment following non-payment of a confiscation order and the power to revoke such an order. The case was resolved in the Respondent's favour.
R v L - Sonal was instructed in respect of enforcement proceedings following convictions for drugs offences. The case involved advising in respect of appointing a receiver and special consideration had to be given to jurisdictional issues in trying to give effect to a confiscation order on a property in South Africa.

Violent Crime

R v S - Defending one of 3 defendants charged with Conspiracy to Rob and having a firearm with intent to commit an Indictable offence involving the attempted robbery at a newsagents where ammonia was sprayed into the face of the shop keepers.
R v S - Defending in a blackmail case which involved cross-examining the complainant (and ex-partner of the defendant) on previous sexual history and previous unsupported allegations of sexual assault. The defendant was acquitted by the jury.
R v I - Defending a 15 year old boy charged with wounding with intent whereby he hit a fellow classmate over the head with a hammer within the vicinity of his school. He pleaded guilty and following lengthy mitigation, he was sentenced to a community order.
R v H - Defending (as a led junior) a defendant charged with others with conspiracy to rob. The case concerned a series of 25 car jackings over a period of 3 months and involved the examination and preparation of complex cell sites analysis expert evidence.

Sexual Offences

R v N - Sonal represented one of 3 young defendants charged with multiple counts of Rape against 2 vulnerable young girls, one of whom suffered from serious learning difficulties and the second of whom suffered from Downs Syndrome. Due to extent of their learning difficulties the complainants could not be directly challenged about their evidence and leading questions in cross examination were not permitted. The defendant was acquitted.
R v O - Sonal secured the acquittal of a defendant charged with historic sexual abuse against his sister's best friend when she was 10 years old.
R v M - Sonal secured an acquittal for the defendant who was charged with stranger rape of a 57 year old woman 5 years earlier. The evidence included semen DNA and the issue was one of consent.
R v P - Sonal represented the defendant charged with administering a substance with intent, contrary to section 61of the Sexual offences Act 2003. It was alleged that the defendant put MCAT into the drink of the complainant (which was accepted). The defendant was acquitted.
R v A - The defendant was charged with two counts of sexual assault of a complainant. Following an acquittal on Count 2 in the first trial. Sonal went on to argue successfully the merits of adducing that acquittal in the second trial. The defendant was acquitted.

Other Cases

R v A - Sonal represented one of six defendants charged with public order offences following their controversial protests at the homecoming parade for soldiers of the 2nd Battalion Royal Anglican Regiment. The trial centred on the argument of freedom of speech under Article 10 of the Human Rights Act versus using words such as 'British Soldiers go to Hell' that caused harassment, alarm and distress. Sonal secured one of the two acquittals in this case.