Indian business student, Visak Rajesh Leela, has avoided jail after he pleaded guilty to a charge of unlawfully attempting to take a child or cause a child to be taken or detained.
Judge Martin Nolan said the case was “somewhat unusual” before sentencing Leela – who was in Ireland on a student visa at the time of the offence – to a three year suspended sentence and ordering him to leave Ireland within two weeks and not return for a period of 10 years.
The court heard that on the evening in question, Leela had gone to an Indian celebration at an address in North Dublin where he had encountered a brother and sister he didn’t know.
CCTV showed the defendant running at the 5 year old boy who was the subject of the charge of attempted abduction.
Passing sentence, Judge Nolan said he did not believe that Leela was a “danger to children”.
As Gript reported earlier on in the proceedings last September , Cloverhill District Court heard that the accused, who has been in Ireland for 10 months at the time maintained that he had no sinister intent towards the child in question.
Garda evidence read before the court detailed how Leela was captured on CCTV interacting with two children. Gardaí said that the younger child – a boy – involved came to the door of the apartment before running back inside followed by the accused.
The next few moments are not captured by CCTV but the accused reappeared before the cameras with the child “under his arm” whereupon he went out through the front door with an older female child following.
The court heard that the female child requested the accused to bring the boy back and that he did so “moments later”.
The accused then left the door of the apartment but came back and attempted to open the door again.
Defending counsel Michael Kelleher argued that his client had made a mistake while “intoxicated” and that he was a person whose parents were of modest means and wished to pursue a postgraduate degree in Ireland.
He argued that a jury must decide “if this was misguided, foolish, horse play by a drunk man,” adding that he was “adamant” that his client’s intention was innocent.
Mr. Justice Alan Mitchell said that he was refusing bail because of the seriousness of the charges and the weight of the sentence they carry on conviction.
He said that reporting restrictions on the address of the accused should be kept restricted to the location as “South Dublin” and that the specific address cannot be reported.
Kelleher argued that there was a danger to not only the accused but his “flatmates” should the address be reported, although counsel for the media organisations challenging the reporting ban on the publication of the address and the earlier lifted reporting of the accused’s name said that these concerns were “nebulous”