Manveer has an exclusive defence practice specialising in the areas of serious crime and complex fraud.
He has an exceptional track record in securing acquittals as well as lenient sentencing disposals owing to his ‘assertive and charismatic’ style of advocacy. He is routinely requested by name by both solicitors and clients alike.
Recent instructions include the successful defence of a semi-professional football player, as well as defending the only person acquitted of robbing elite cyclist Mark Cavendish.
Prior to joining the Bar, Manveer specialised in international sanctions law and reported on the leading judgments of the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal.
Manveer’s practice is split between legal aid and private work.
R v OO – Operation Chamber – Lead defendant acquitted of robbing Olympic cyclist Mark Cavendish and his family at knifepoint in their home. Robbers made off with a safe and ‘one of a kind’ Richard Mille timepieces valued at £700,000. Both co-defendants were convicted and received 15-20-year custodial sentences. BBC news story here.
R v MP – Semi-professional football player acquitted of robbery. Good character and position on team retained.
R v RG – Operation Scoutish – £35million international money-laundering operation. Large-scale NCA investigation involving 50,000+ page count. BBC news story here
R v KS – Operation Pousada – (Ongoing) Multi-kilo Class A drug conspiracy across Peterborough and Cambridge.
R v FW – (Ongoing) Multi-million-pound investment fraud and Bounce Back Loan fraud.
R v FL – Defendant acquitted in Albanian human trafficking ring; charges having been brought under the Modern Slavery Act 2015. The Defendant successfully proved that he was, in fact, a victim of the exploitation ring and was forced to cultivate cannabis against his will at the behest of dangerous criminals.
R v KV – Defendant acquitted of s.18 GBH. Complainant suffered a broken back in an assault described as being committed with ‘utter malice and hatred’. Defendant disputed intent.
R v RS – Defendant acquitted of fraud by abuse of position. Complex legal issues in respect of mental capacity and Lasting Powers of Attorney.
R v AF – Defendant acquitted of affray and possession of a meat cleaver in a public place. Midway through the evidence, the Crown dropped the case.
R v DG – Operation Justinian – Defendant indicted with manslaughter. Led by Trevor Burke KC.
R v YV – Operation Gravity – Largescale county lines conspiracy to supply Class A drugs from London to Norfolk. Secured SSO for the lead defendant following discussions on the basis of plea.
R v KA – Operation Thames – Lead defendant in multi-handed conspiracy to supply Class A drugs from London to Medway, Grimsby, and Southend.
R v KJ – Defendant acquitted of Class A drug supply, despite 44 wraps of crack cocaine and heroin concealed between his buttocks and observed interacting with known Class A drug users moments prior to arrest.
R v OK – Defendant acquitted of assaulting three prison guards with a knife. Following devastating cross-examination of the first complainant prison guard, the Crown reviewed the case and offered no evidence to the entire indictment.
R v BS – Submission of no case to answer in respect of ABH assault. An independent eyewitness positively identified the defendant in a PACE-compliant ID procedure, and the defendant also admitted to being present in the area during his police interview.
R v IH – Defendant acquitted of motor vehicle theft and handling stolen goods. The defendant had been the driver of a stolen vehicle displaying false plates mere hours after it was reported stolen. The defendant failed to stop for police and was involved in a high-speed police pursuit, ending in a road traffic collision.
R v RM – Privately instructed in successful appeal against conviction, involving submissions on the interpretation of a non-molestation order. Defendant retained his good character.
R v IQ – Defendant acquitted of assaulting a police officer by deliberately coughing in her face during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. BWV supported the Crown’s case.
R v GN – Submission of no case to answer in DV assault case, where the complainant had sustained significant injuries and provided an immediate first account to police officers. Meticulous cross-examination completely undermined the complainant’s credibility and account, revealing that she had in fact lied about how she had sustained her injuries.
R v RB – Defendant acquitted of sexual assault. Prosecution relied upon live evidence of the complainant, as well as text messages sent by the defendant in the form of a confession and apology after the incident. Defendant retained his good character.
R v SL – Defendant acquitted of s.18 GBH / wounding with intent. Defendant was alleged to have stabbed the complainant with a ‘hunting-style knife’ outside a school. The incident was captured on CCTV and the defendant was positively identified in a PACE-compliant ID procedure.
R v TG – Privately instructed by defendant acquitted in complex drug driving case, following a successful application to exclude the Crown’s expert evidence. Defendant retained his good character.
R v ZG – Privately instructed by the North London gym that refused to close its premises during the UK Government’s COVID-19 lockdown measures. The local authority had applied for a closure order against the gym, sparking widespread publicity.
R v NH – Defendant acquitted of ‘hate crime’ assault: throwing boiling liquid over the complainant due to her homosexual orientation and disability. Crown relied upon live evidence of the complainant, as well as CCTV footage. Meticulous cross-examination undermined the complainant’s account and veracity.
R v QT – Defendant acquitted of knifepoint robbery. Complainant had positively identified the defendant in a PACE-compliant ID parade. Bad character evidence (four previous convictions for robbery) also formed part of the prosecution case.
R v DB – Defendant acquitted of possession of an offensive weapon (cosh). Defence of ‘reasonable excuse’ raised, namely, that the defendant was on his way to return the weapon to the police station, despite having passed a police station earlier that day and attempted to avoid officers during his arrest.
R v AW – Defendant acquitted of possession of a bladed article. Defence of lack of knowledge had been raised, despite the knife being located next to the defendant whilst the sole-occupant and driver of a vehicle.
R v YA – Defendant acquitted of domestic violence assault. Meticulous cross-examination of the complainant exposed devastating inconsistencies, including a dishonest motive to fabricate the allegations.
R v LW – Submission of no case to answer in respect of two separate allegations of TWOC, alleged to have been committed on the same day in close proximity. Defendant had been under high-level police surveillance in respect of a recent gang shooting.
R v AR – Privately instructed defendant acquitted of being in charge of a motor vehicle whilst over the prescribed alcohol limit. Submission of no case to answer involving complex legal argument and authorities.
R v SK – Defendant acquitted of possession of a bladed article (machete). Defendant was the sole occupant and driver of his motor vehicle when officers discovered the machete tucked into the plastic edge of the driver’s seat.
R v RS – Defendant acquitted of two counts of possession of a bladed article (zombie knife and machete). Two different defences raised: lack of knowledge in respect of the zombie knife, and ‘good reason’ in respect of the machete.
R v JT – Defendant acquitted of all robbery charges in multi-handed trial, involving principles of joint enterprise liability and ID evidence.
University of Law – BPTC
University of Southampton – LLB (Hons)