The High Court in Demerara has declined to exercise jurisdiction over a bail application filed by Attorney-at-Law Darren Wade on behalf of 20-year-old Police Constable Ryan Greene, ruling that it was not brought through the procedures prescribed by law.
In a ruling delivered on Wednesday, Justice Zamilla Ally-Seepaul struck out the fixed-date application filed on November 3, finding that it was an attempt to challenge a Magistrate’s refusal of bail but had not been brought as an appeal or judicial review.
The ruling came a day after King’s Counsel Darshan Ramdhani, representing Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Shalimar Ali-Hack, urged the court to strike out the application, contending that it was fundamentally flawed.
The Judge’s decision did not determine the merits of Greene’s bail request.
“The principle that substance should prevail over form has limits,” Justice Ally-Seepaul said, explaining that although procedural defects could be corrected, the court could not construct a different case for a litigant or choose a legal route the applicant had declined to pursue.
Greene is jointly charged with United States-sanctioned Opposition Leader Azruddin Mohamed, 39, under Section 9 of the Cybercrime Act over the alleged unauthorised access to and sale of footage from the Safe Country Surveillance System.
The charge relates to footage of the October 12, 2026 shooting outside the Georgetown home of Senior Superintendent Prem Narine, head of the Guyana Police Force’s Special Branch Unit.
Mohamed and two of his workers are alleged to have been involved in the shooting, while prosecutors alleged that footage of the incident was accessed without authorisation from the Police Command Centre in Liliendaal and subsequently sold to Mohamed for $800,000.
Greene and Mohamed were charged on October 30 and appeared before Magistrate Abigail Gibbs at the Sparendaam Magistrates’ Courts. Both were denied bail and remanded until November 24.
Police Constable Ashton Chappelle, 24, was also charged with the same offence on November 9 and remanded to prison until November 24.
Wade filed the application on Greene’s behalf, seeking bail under Sections 6 and 32(3) of the Bail Act and Articles 139(1) and 144(2)(a) of the Constitution of Guyana.
Greene’s father, Randy Green, was identified as acting as his son’s next friend, while Detective Cadet Officer Stephen Pines was named as the respondent.
The DPP challenged the court’s jurisdiction and sought to have the application struck out.
King’s Counsel Darshan Ramdhani, among other things, argued that the Bail Act provides two routes to challenge a Magistrate’s bail decision: an appeal to the Full Court under Section 17 or judicial review under Section 20.
Justice Ally-Seepaul found that Greene’s application was neither an appeal under Section 17 nor a judicial review application filed in accordance with the Judicial Review Act and Part 56 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Justice Ally-Seepaul noted that the allegations that the Magistrate failed to assess the statutory criteria, lacked evidence to support the objection to bail and did not provide written reasons were challenges to the legality and propriety of the Magistrate’s decision.
The Judge also rejected the argument that Section 32(3) allowed the High Court to reconsider the bail request afresh. The provision preserves jurisdiction otherwise vested in the court but does not independently create a procedure for reviewing a Magistrate’s decision.
“The Magistrate’s decision is therefore a judicial decision with legal effect,” Justice Ally-Seepaul said, adding that it could not be ignored simply because the accused claimed entitlement to bail.
Such a decision, she said, must be challenged through the route prescribed by law.
While acknowledging the importance of personal liberty and the need to avoid denying substantive justice over procedural errors, the Judge said the application did not clearly identify the jurisdiction being invoked.
The Judge further noted that citing constitutional provisions did not, in itself, transform the application into a properly constituted claim for constitutional relief.
In the ruling, Justice Ally-Seepaul also addressed the Attorney General (AG)’s involvement but distinguished between being notified of proceedings and being properly joined as a party.
She noted that the AG had been brought to the court’s attention because Greene’s application relied on constitutional provisions.
However, she found that her later direction to serve the AG did not retrospectively convert the application into a properly constituted constitutional proceeding.
In the circumstances, the Judge declined to order that the matter be amended or converted into judicial review or constitutional proceedings, noting that Wade maintained that the application was not one for judicial review.
The Judge ruled that the court ought not to exercise jurisdiction over the application in its present form and struck it out.
As such, Greene remains on remand at a prison following the court’s decision, which did not determine the merits of his bail application.
Meanwhile, Mohamed’s mother, Bonita Mohamed, has filed a bail application on his behalf, which is scheduled to come up for a second hearing on Thursday before Justice Priscilla Chandra-Hanif at the High Court.
Discover more from INews Guyana
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
