Criminal Law | Report | Doc

Running head: CRIMINAL LAW
CRIMINAL LAW
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

CRIMINAL LAW1
Issue
The primary issues are as follows:-
 Whether the arrest made by the police at the festival can be considered to be valid.
 What may be the prospects of Jane attaining bail?
 Whether the police had the power and the authority to conduct a search on Jane.
 Whether the police violated any procedures during the questioning of Jane.
 Whether the installation of cameras in the house of Jane can be considered to be lawful.
Rule
Section 4 as provided in the Bail Act of the year 1977 states that when any individual is
accused of any particular offence, and when that particular individual is detained in custody in
connection to that specific offence, then in such a situation the individual shall have the
entitlement to the grant of bail, unless the decision maker in relation to the bail is mandated to
reject the bail by this particular Act.
Section 8 as provided in the aforementioned Act states that the decision maker regarding
the bail, should conduct inquiries in relation to the accused, as the decision maker considers
necessary. No examination or cross-examination in connection to the accused shall be conducted
by the decision maker of the bail regarding the offence with which he is charged.
The case of Hyder v Commonwealth of Australia [2012] NSWCA 336 shall be
considered to be a significant case in this regard. In this case, the court deliberated the state and
the condition of the mind, which shall be essential for any particular ‘Federal Police officer’ to
have sensible and rational grounds on which an arrest may be made as per section 3W as

CRIMINAL LAW2
mentioned in the Crimes Act (Cth) of the year 1914. The section mentioned above forwards that
an enforcement officer shall be able to make an arrest of an individual, without a warrant, if it is
believed by the enforcement officer on rational and sensible grounds that the individual has
committed or shall be committing any particular offence.
The Control of Weapons Act (Vic) of the year 1990 and the Drugs, Poisons and
Controlled Substances Act (Vic) of the year 1981 are significant legislations in this regard. The
legislations mentioned above discuss that how an enforcement officer should conduct private
search upon individuals. According to the aforementioned Acts, it may be said that under certain
circumstances, the enforcement officers shall have the authority to do a private search on
individuals, without any kind of warrant, in any public location. If it is reasonably believed by an
enforcement officer that an individual possess illegal drugs or other harmful items, or if an
individual is discovered in a location where vehement crime is prevailing, or if an individual is
discovered in a designated location, or if any individual who is over fourteen years carries tools
or instruments for the purposes of graffiti and is located in public transport, then a private search
may be conducted by the officer.
Section 139 as provided in the Evidence Act of the year 2008 states that an individual,
who has been detained and who may be questioned by an investigating officer, must be
cautioned by that particular officer. As per the aforementioned section, the investigating officer
should have the adequate authority to question the individual who has been arrested and
detained. As per the aforementioned section, if an investigating officer fails to caution the
individual who has been arrested, in a reasonable manner, then it may be said that any statement
made or any action performed by that individual, during the course of questioning, cannot be