Thug loses appeal against jail sentence
A violent ex-boyfriend who repeatedly harrassed his former partner has been told by top judges he 'has to learn' and cannot complain about his jail term.
Anil Kumar Suman ignored a restraining order designed to protect his victim, and attacked her in her own home.
Even after being locked up for that incident, he sent her letters and a birthday card for her young daughter from prison.
The 41-year-old, of Dudley Road, Blakenhall, Wolverhampton was jailed for two-and-a-half years at the city's crown court in April.
He previously admitted four counts of breaching a restraining order and one of assault by beating.
Suman challenged his sentence at the Court of Appeal, in London, with his lawyers arguing it was far too tough.
But his complaints were rejected by three of the country's most senior judges, who said his punishment could not be criticised.
Mr Justice Foskett, sitting with Lady Justice Hallett and Mr Justice Goss, added: "This man has to learn that his continued attempts to contact the victim and her daughter must stop."
The court heard that, after breaking up with his girlfriend in October 2015, Suman admitted two counts of battery and was handed a restraining order.
That banned him from going near his ex-partner's address, or contacting her or her young daughter in any way.
After ignoring the ban four times, he was jailed for 16 weeks in July last year.
But, almost as soon as he was released, he rang her mobile phone on October 28.
When he received no response, he went to her home at about 8pm a few days later and became abusive when he was asked to leave.
To keep the peace, the woman allowed him inside the house, but he viciously attacked her later in the evening.
Police were called and he was arrested and put in custody on remand.
Yet, still refusing to recognise their relationship was over, Suman sent two letters to the victim and a birthday card for her daughter.
Mr Justice Foskett said a jail term for Suman was 'inevitable'.
The Crown Court judge was entitled to treat the offences committed from inside prison as being particularly serious.
Dismissing the appeal, he added: "We have to decide whether the overall sentence was excessive. In our judgment it was not.
"It was a just and proportionate sentence for offences of this nature."
