Shahid KhanManaging Director | Solicitor
Legal 500 - 2019
‘Pro-active’ head of team Shahid Khan has ‘a prolific work rate’ and ‘goes well beyond the call of duty’
Legal 500 - 2020
‘Advice Wise Solicitors Limited’s crime team has been kept busy… Shahid Khan leads the team’
Legal 500 - 2021
‘Advice Wise Solicitors Limited is led by the ‘incredible’ Shahid Khan, a specialist in murder, complex fraud, money laundering and drugs offences.’
Specialising in some of the most complex parts of criminal defence, Shahid Khan, Managing Director of Advice Wise, is one of our most experienced and skilful solicitors. Shahid’s dedicated hard work and commitment over the years has seen his firm grow, as can be seen from his ranking in the Legal 500!
Working for matters that include, although are not limited to, serious violence, complex frauds, money laundering, and drug and driving offences, Shahid prides himself on providing clear, realistic and professional advice in all matters and his reputation for vigorously fighting for his client’s rights. Affirmation of his successful practice, built on the foundations of excellent reputation and recommendations can be found by talking to his former clients. Not only that, Shahid is also the Supervisor for the Criminal Department and specialises in Criminal Defence work. He is a qualified duty solicitor and regularly appears nationwide before the Magistrates’ Court and at police stations. This is only furthered by the fact that Mr Khan regularly defends clients who are being prosecuted by the National Crime Agency, Serious Fraud Office, Sapphire Unit (serious sex offence unit in the Metropolitan Police), as well as Trading Standards and the HMRC investigations and prosecutions. That and his extensive knowledge of POCA, confiscation, civil recovery, restraint orders, seizures and forfeiture, are integral to the qualities that make Shahid Khan a brilliant solicitor.
Shahid’s reputation also extends to looking after vulnerable clients including young people and those with mental health difficulties. Amongst the strong client base, he regularly represents professionals from all walks of life such as solicitors, immigration advisors, pharmacists and banking officials who face allegations which could damage their professional and personal reputation. His interests also include white-collar investigations, defending those accused or charged with immigration offences and those cases where the evidence is voluminous. What can be said without question is that Shahid Khan makes sure the firm provides the same level of exceptionally high standard of attention and care to all of his clients.
Tactics are a key strength of Shahid and this combined with his proactive approach to dealing with cases and his calm and efficient manner allows his clients to feel comfortable and at ease. After all, Shahid’s clients are usually going through some of their most difficult challenges and therefore it is important that they feel that they can talk to him. Regardless of how small, large or complex a client’s case may be, you can be reassured that as a client of Advice Wise, Shahid Khan will have his best people on hand for you.
With his extensive and impressive background, Shahid Khan has a proactive approach toward his cases and a calm and efficient manner which allows his clients to feel comfortable and at ease. He takes time to ensure that each client understands how the law applies to their case. Due to his experience, he is able to deal with complex legal issues and explain them to his clients so that they know their case is in the best possible hands.
Some of Shahid’s most recent notable cases are below:
R v VL and others (Southwark Crown Court) – Representing a defendant in a 9-hander relating to a fraud committed against various well established life insurance companies. The case centres around the fraudulent creation of insurance brokerages and the subsequent fraudulent policy applications to insurance providers, resulting in over £1 million of commission payments being paid out. The case involves just under 20,000 pages of evidence which includes extensive banking material. The case is being prosecuted by the Specialist Fraud Division of the Crown Prosecution Service. Such is the complexity of this matter that the Defendants have been split into two trials.
R v WK and another – Representing the defendant accused of a conspiracy to cause a computer to perform a function to secure unauthorised access to a program. It is alleged that the accused accessed the National Immunisation and Vaccination System in order to enter falsified records of people who were vaccinated from Covid-19 when they had in fact not been vaccinated. It is alleged that the accused is an employee of the NHS and has worked with another to carry out the alleged offences. This case is being investigated by the Central Specialist Crime, Cybercrime Unit.
R v AS and others (Canterbury Crown Court) – Currently representing the leading Defendant and another Defendant in a multi-hander conspiracy to facilitate illegal immigration to a member state. The case revolves around three individuals stopped from crossing the border at Dover as they were alleged to have had fake UK Passports. Following analysis by police of mobile phone data, searches were carried out at the Defendant’s home address which contained a number of electronic devices and physical evidence of the production of fraudulent passports. The case involves call data records, phone downloads and significant banking and ANPR evidence.
R v GSM and others (Harrow Crown Court) – Operation Encore; Representing one of five defendants said to be involved in a London based Organised Crime Gang (OCG). The case involves approximately 5 months of surveillance during which it is said the defendants had been engaged in the act of money laundering a significant amount of money, primarily received from the sale of drugs. The surveillance shows the movement of alleged money in and out of properties linked to the OCG. In total, approximately £906,205.00 in cash was seized.
R v IR and others (Inner London Crown Court) – Representing the lead Defendant in relation to suspected ghost brokering. It is alleged that the defendant was purchasing legitimate insurance policies using false information or was issuing fake insurance documents designed to look like legitimate policies issued by genuine insurance companies. It is alleged that the value of these transactions is believed to be well in excess of £200,000.
R v JO and others (Kingston Crown Court) – Operation Venetic; Represented one of five defendants alleged to have been involved in the transfer of criminal property. It is alleged that they formed different parts of a professionally organised network which moved significant amounts of cash, namely £4.6 million in a little under three months. It was said that the Defendants used Encrochat, and each operated an individual handle. It was suggested that the cash moved derived from drug dealing and that the dealing would have involved substantial amounts of drugs to realise the amount of money laundered. It was said that the defendant was in fact the functional and effective CFO. This case involved voluminous messages from the Encrochat handles.
R v IJ (Isleworth Crown Court) – Represented the Defendant who was accused of being a professional money launderer, between multi-jurisdictions. The Defendant, a national of India but residing in the UAE, had allegedly attempted to remove £249,570 from the UK in cash in his luggage. It was said that the Defendant had made a number of trips to the UK from the UAE and that it was likely he had laundered money on previous occasions as well. The case involved various business documentation obtained from the UAE seeking to show the legitimacy of the money.
Police v SN – Operation Marbles; Represented the Director of an energy supplier of gas and electric to the commercial energy market, accused of conspiracy to defraud. It was said that the fraud that the company has been employing is to gain customers dishonestly by making and using forged documents. There were a number of other companies also being investigated for similar offending as part of the conspiracy between a group of companies. This investigation was being conducted by the City of London Police’s Fraud Squad. However, through expert representation at the police station, no further action was taken against the client.
R v MLR and others (Kingston Crown Court) – Operation Slipstream; Represented the main defendant in a conspiracy involving 17 Defendants. It is said that our client was involved in the production and supply of fraudulent documents for use in fraud against the Home Office, the United States Embassy, to a bank for mortgage purposes and to various local councils. The case involved a large amount of evidence in the form of documentary evidence, telephone evidence and banking evidence. The case was being prosecuted by the International Justice and Organised Crime Division of the CPS and the complexity was such that the case had to be split into 4 different trials.
R v MAR and others (Blackfriars Crown Court) – Operation Falcon; Represented one of the lead defendants in a multi-handed conspiracy to defraud. It is alleged that this was a sophisticated and large scale internet-enabled banking fraud involving over £12 million. This case involved over 400,000 pages of complex phone, computer and banking documents. The complexity arises from the hacking of various companies on an international scale. The trial lasted over 4 months.
TS v AM (Lewes Crown Court) – Represented the director of a large airport parking company in proceedings brought by Trading Standards relating to fraud and money laundering amounting to approximately £1.8 million.
R v MT and others (Leicester Crown Court) – A multi-hander conspiracy to defraud Virgin Media by dishonestly obtaining television subscription services. The Prosecution alleged that the conspiracy involved a potential loss of up to £200 million, and involved a huge volume of complex expert evidence as well as legal argument on admissibility.
R v MN (Croydon Crown Court) – Operation Saisir; defended the lead defendant in a ‘Crash for Cash’ conspiracy to defraud approximately £6m involving over 250 staged accidents and exaggerated claims and more than 154,000 pages of complex evidence.
R v SN (Central Criminal Court) – Represented the Director of a company involved in a conspiracy to defraud companies such as British Gas, Eon and other electricity and gas suppliers. The case involved over 55,000 pages of evidence.
R v VG (Derby Crown Court) – Operation Bindaree; Represented in the defence of an individual accused of money laundering nearly £100,000.00 where the total fraud against companies such as Airbus, Carlsberg, Sportswift and others amounted to almost £7.5million.
R v BKB and another (Leicester Crown Court) – Operation Gage; Defended the wife in a serious case consisting of 31 counts across two indictments relating to various frauds such as identity fraud, banking fraud and property fraud as well as money laundering. The defence in the case related to duress and “black magic” was a factor in the defence.
R v VE and others (Snaresbrook Crown Court) – Represented the defendant in a multi-hander fraudulent evasion of duty case where it was alleged that over 200,000 cigarettes were brought into the UK on which UK duty had not been paid.
R v FM and others (Wood Green Crown Court) – Operation Hove; Defended the lead defendant who was an immigration advisor in a case where the Prosecution alleged the Defendant was submitting false applications and supporting documents to the Home Office.
R v NA (Southwark Crown Court) – Operation Cudgegong; Conspiracy involving 9 Defendants who allegedly breached the UK Immigration rules. The case involved complex tracking of payments and amounted to over 25,000 pages of evidence.
R v OS (Snaresbrook Crown Court) – Represented a Solicitor accused of making 192 fraudulent Immigration Applications. This was reduced to only 16 counts.
R v AS (Birmingham Crown Court) – Representing the Defendant who is accused of the offence of Encouragement of Terrorism. This relates to tweets and messages sent from particular accounts allegedly linked to him during which it is suggested he is encouraging acts of terrorism to be carried out. It is alleged that there are 32,000 messages which have been investigated. The case is being prosecuted by a Specialist Prosecutor in the CPS Counter Terrorism Division.
R v DB and another (Central Criminal Court) – Operation Tielen; Representing one of two defendants accused of being involved in Murder and Attempted Murder. It is alleged that the Defendants, along with others who are yet to be identified, had driven to a location in East London where they have essentially carried out a drive by shooting, killing one male and injuring another. The car was then taken to a separate location and burnt. The defendant was identified via extensive CCTV but the case involves elements of forensic evidence, cell site, ANPR and evidence of potential drug dealing and drill music.
R v AA and another (Central Criminal Court) – Representing the main defendant accused of being involved in a robbery which has then led to the attempted murder of the victim, who was said to have been driven into by the defendant.
R v BA and others (Snaresbrook Crown Court) – Operation Garboil; Representing the lead defendant in a six hander conspiracy to rob. It is alleged that the Defendants plotted and then carried out a Robbery at a DPD warehouse and were able to steal over £190,000 worth of high value goods in under 11 minutes. This case involves the alleged use of weapons including a firearm and it is suggested that an employee was bound and gagged. This case involves extensive CCTV footage, ANPR and cell site data.
R v FM and others (Snaresbrook Crown Court) – Currently representing a leading Defendant in a conspiracy to rob a high roller from a Casino in East London. The robbery is alleged to have been premeditated and involved the use of large knives and machetes. It is alleged that the Defendant played a key part having supplied intrinsic knowledge of the casino. Some of those accused of this crime have later been charged with an unrelated offence of murder suggesting the criminality of those involved. The case involves different strands of evidence such as extensive CCTV footage, ANPR, telephone downloads and call data records.
R v CM and another (Blackfriars Crown Court) – Operation Newmills; Represented the main defendant in relation to Murder and Conspiracy to Rob. Various issues in the case arose in relation to the cause of death. This case involved the instruction of various experts by the defence including a pathologist, toxicologist, voice expert, scene of crime expert, telephone expert and cell site expert.
R v SF and others (Central Criminal Court) – Operation Pietown; An investigation into the murder of a male who died from several stab wounds. The case involved 4 defendants and voluminous evidence including cell site, lengthy CCTV evidence and previous gang history held by the police.
R v SB, AA and others (Southwark Crown Court) – Operation Adria; Represented two of the four defendants in this matter which related to a murder by stabbing at a DLR station in London. The two defendants we represented were accused of assisting the two murderers by harbouring them in order to evade arrest. This case involved significant analysis of CCTV, call data records and messages as well as legal issues as to whether the offence was in fact made out. Both defendants who were represented were joined to the main Murder trial at short notice of approximately three weeks and therefore significant resources needed to be expended to ensure the matter was ready for trial. When phone downloads were taken into account, the pages of evidence was in excess of 50,000 pages. Following a lengthy trial, both defendants were acquitted.
Police v KC – Represented the accused in this serious allegation of conspiracy to murder. This case has been made all the more complex considering the attempted murder took place in Pakistan. It is alleged that this centres around a disagreement between two businessmen and it is alleged that the accused “arranged” for the shooting of his businessman in Pakistan.
HSE v JR and another (Birmingham Crown Court) – Represented a large-scale property development company and their director in relation to alleged breaches of health and safety law which led to the death of a worker on their site.
R v ME and others (Central Criminal Court) – Represented the main defendant for five counts of attempted murder after it was alleged that he “rammed” his vehicle into a number of pedestrians on a pavement.
R v LU (Snaresbrook Crown Court) – Represented a defendant accused of attempted murder after it was alleged that he used items to assault his partner.
R v MJ and others (Snaresbrook Crown Court) – Operation Ekainy; An investigation into a shooting in broad daylight using a shotgun. The Defendant was charged with Attempted Murder which was later dropped to possession of a firearm with intent to endanger life. Successful half time submissions were made and the defendant was acquitted of this count.
R v SL (Central Criminal Court) – Operation Irmenu; Represented a defendant charged with possession of a firearm with intent to endanger life in relation to a “shootout” that took place between two parties in a South London Street. The case involved cell site, DNA and ballistics evidence and involved the instruction of a firearm expert.
R v MMH and others (Central Criminal Court) – Operation Deghvard; Represented one of the main accused in a 11-hander conspiracy to inflict grievous bodily harm with intent. The case involved extensive evidence relating to cell site, telematics data and gang evidence and was centred on a severe group attack using various weapons on an unarmed man. The defendant was originally charged with Attempted Murder, however this was dropped. The case involved over 150,000 pages of complex evidence.
R v MJ (Nottingham Crown Court) – Represented a defendant accused of kidnap and possession of an imitation firearm. The alleged incident featured on BBC Crimewatch.
R v MI and others (Southwark Crown Court) – Operation Brasshand; Multi-handed conspiracy where the investigation was conducted by the Met Police Organised Vehicle Crime Unit. It was alleged that an Organised Crime Gang were involved in the theft of over 120 vehicles from the London area, many as a result of domestic burglaries. The total value of the loss was well in excess of £2.5 million.
R v SA (Kingston Crown Court) – Operation Cornpipe; Represented a defendant in an investigation into an Organised Crime Group involving the re-registration of high value stolen vehicles, conducted by the Counter Terrorism Command.
R v MB and another (Southwark Crown Court) – Operation Hipsometer; Represented a defendant charged with another for conspiracy to handle stolen goods. This related to over 100 stolen vehicles including motorbikes and spans over a 5-year period. This case was investigated by the Met Police Organised Vehicle Crime Unit.
R v MMH and others (Central Criminal Court) – Operation Tuhana; Represented the main defendant in a multi-hander conspiracy to possess a firearm with intent to endanger life. The case centred on a police “sting operation.”
R v SH (Croydon Crown Court) – Kidnap, Blackmail and Torture of a prominent East London businessman; this case attracted significant media interest.
R v DF and another (Inner London Crown Court) – conspiracy involving the burglary of properties and theft of high value motor vehicles from within them. The case was made complex by the number of burglaries (46) and volume of mobile phone traffic/cell site analysis used to track defendants. The total value of the loss was in the region of £400,000.
R v MS (Southwark Crown Court) – A large scale operation whereby the Defendant was alleged to have been a leading figure in a conspiracy to “ring” luxury motor vehicles. The total value of the loss was in the region of £1.5 million.
R v MH and others (Snaresbrook Crown Court) – Operation Sega; Representing a Defendant in a large-scale operation involving significant police resources to target a wide array of drug dealing in East London. The Defendant is one of nine defendants on a 24-count master indictment. The investigation resulted in a plethora of telephone seizures which has led to voluminous call data and telephone material being served, in excess of 20,000 pages. The case involves forensic examination of cell site on particular dates to identify usage of the drug line and involves the instruction of a cell site expert.
R v AH and others (Chelmsford Crown Court) – Operation Topaz; Represented the main defendant in a 7-hander concerning the supply of class of class A drugs using a drug line called Tariq. Dubbed the “King of Maldon” by a Learned Judge, the Defendant faced several strands of evidence put together by the National Crime Agency. It was said that he was the principal in a Maldon based Organised Crime Group dealing drugs throughout the Essex area for a number of years, allegedly making £1.5 - £2 million per annum. It was alleged that the Defendant funnelled the proceeds of crime through various front businesses which then funded a lavish lifestyle in which the Defendant purchased high value vehicles, jewellery and clothing. The case involved in excess of 30,000 pages of used evidence ranging from CCTV footage, BWV footage, banking material, phone downloads and call data records requiring careful analysis. We were also been instructed to represent another individual concerned in this conspiracy.
R v KM and others (Southwark Crown Court) – Operation Meropia; Represented one of the main defendants in a 6-hander concerning the importation of Class A and B drugs, namely Cocaine and Cannabis concealed in a consignment of sweet potatoes from Jamaica and Pakistan. The Defendant was linked to a total of 7 mobile phones and accordingly this case involved significant analysis of mobile phone downloads, cell site data, CCTV footage and ANPR data. The total street value of the drugs seized amounted to in excess of £3.5 million.
R v AA and others (Harrow Crown Court) – Represented the lead defendant in a four-hander drug dealing case. This case became all the more complex when over 80,000 pages of telephone downloads were served after the trial had begun. The factual matrix of the case was vast, spanning several years, with much of the key evidence buried amongst the voluminous telephone material. There was a cutthroat defence presented against all three co-defendants. Evidentially detailed issues of modern slavery, historic rape allegations and money laundering abroad in the context of the sex trade were all levelled against the Defendant and fought off.
R v HB and others (St Alban’s Crown Court) – Operation Mantis; Represented one of six defendants charged with conspiracy to supply class A drugs in a County Line drug operation from London to Hertfordshire. The case involved evidence relating to two simultaneous drug lines for which the key evidence against the Defendants was extensive call data records/schedules. With regards to the Defendant, the defence related to duress/modern slavery provisions which required careful analysis based on the evidence. The investigation was carried out by a dedicated team of police officers tackling county line drug operations, namely Operation Mantis.
R v MR (Birmingham Crown Court) – Operation Aigrette; Defended one of the leading money laundering suspects in approximately £300 million conspiracy to import Class A drugs, namely Heroin. Trial lasted over 2 months. Complex issues of fact and law, particularly in relation to disclosure. Large number of used and unused material.
R v HM (Southwark Crown Court) – Conspiracy to supply Class A drugs with a street value in excess of £2.5 million.
R v WJ (Kingston Crown Court) – Operation Tiffin; Investigation in relation to a number of individuals concerned with the supply and distribution of wholesale quantities (75kg) of high purity cocaine.
R v DH and others (Bristol Crown Court) – Operation Cleveland; represented a defendant in a large scale multi-hander conspiracy to produce and supply cannabis. The case involves substantial numbers of cannabis farms in 7 properties which were professionally converted to provide perfect growing conditions for cannabis.
R v IB and others (Cambridge Crown Court) – Representing one of three defendants alleged to have been involved in the gang rape of a young female following a night out. Following a lengthy investigation, the Defendant was identified as being one of the males involved through DNA evidence. The case also involves extensive work with ABE evidence and the concept of consent whilst intoxicated.
R v MJ (St Albans Crown Court) – Representing the Defendant charged with 18 counts relating to historical sexual abuse of a minor, from some 10 years ago. This case is at the early stage of proceedings but there is likely to be a wealth of evidence and particular care to be taken around dealing with the victim.
R v MA (Snaresbrook Crown Court) – Representing the Defendant charged with 10 counts relating to historical sexual abuse of two male minors, from some 20 years ago. This case is made all the more complicated given that the Defendant himself may well have been a minor when some of the allegations were made.
R v DA and others (Snaresbrook Crown Court) – Operation Wombarra; Represented the main Defendant in a multi hander comprising of 20 counts relating to the offences of controlling prostitution for gain, rape, human trafficking and other sexual offences. Defendant accused of running a chain of brothels and committing various rapes. The Defendant had assets restrained which were valued at approximately £15 million.
R v WY and others (Central Criminal Court) – Operation Effect; Investigation into human trafficking for sexual exploitation from China and Korea into and around the UK. A multi-hander conspiracy whereby the Defendant was charged in relation to controlling prostitution for gain and subsequent money laundering.
R v DS and another (Isleworth Crown Court) – Represented one of two Defendants alleged to have attempted to Rape as well as falsely imprison the victim. Defence solicitors had to put in significant number of hours of preparation to ensure the background facts were properly and fairly presented.
R v TO and another (Snaresbrook Crown Court) – Represented the first defendant on the Indictment alleging four counts of Rape. The trial lasted 2 ½ weeks. Disclosure submissions dealt with in advance of trial.
R v SC (Chelmsford Crown Court) – Represented the defendant in an alleged rape following a meeting via facebook. The defendant was vulnerable and the assistance of an intermediary was initiated in this case.
R v KN (Snaresbrook Crown Court) – Two counts of Making Indecent Photographs of children contrary to the Protection of Children Act 1978 and one count of Possession of Extreme Pornographic Images Contrary to the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008. It was identified there were gaps in disclosure which resulted in the Crown offering no further evidence.
We pride ourselves in providing clear, realistic and professional advice on all types of criminal matters.
Our solicitors are aware of the emotional sensitivities surrounding many cases in family law ensuring utmost confidentiality.
The complexities of Immigration Law in the UK is one of the most common reasons for clients all over the United Kingdom to contact us.
Our Civil Litigation team can provide you with Advice and Assistance should you ever find yourself involved in a dispute.
Years of experience in advising high profile athletes.