A High Court bail hearing has been set for National Border Patrol Director Daniel Seeram, hours after he was remanded to prison following his conviction for assaulting his now ex-wife.
Kiskadee Watch understands that Seeram’s attorney, Nigel Hughes, moved to the High Court following the remand order, with the bail application set for 11:30 a.m. on Monday before Justice Joy Persaud-Singh. The judge has asked to see the magistrate’s memorandum of reasons along with an affidavit of defence. She ordered that Seeram be kept at the Sparendaam lockups.
Kiskadee Watch also understands that the Attorney General did not object to bail,
Seeram was yesterday morning found guilty of assault causing actual bodily harm against his former wife, Farzana Hamid, following a trial before Magistrate Abigail Gibbs at the Sparendaam Magistrate’s Court.
He was ordered remanded to prison following the verdict and is scheduled to return to court for sentencing on November 2, 2026, at 10:30 a.m.
However, despite the remand order, Seeram remained at the Sparendaam Police Station for several hours yesterday.
Kiskadee Watch observed that Seeram had not been taken away in a prison van to one of the country’s correctional facilities, and he was last seen at the police station at approximately 5:50 p.m.
The High Court application now provides Seeram with an opportunity to seek his release pending sentencing.
The case arose from a complaint filed by Hamid over an incident at the couple’s Cummings Lodge apartment on September 11, 2023. The couple has since divorced.
Hamid told the court that after spending September 10 with family and friends, she and Seeram returned to their apartment. During the early hours of September 11, she said she was awakened by a sharp pain to her head and realised that Seeram was hitting her.
She testified that she got out of bed and began recording the incident on her phone. According to her evidence, Seeram then snatched the phone, threw it against a wall and subsequently threw it into the toilet.
Hamid said she was repeatedly assaulted during the ordeal.
The court also heard that Seeram armed himself with his firearm before leaving the apartment, while Hamid said she fought back by scratching him.
Both parties subsequently reported the matter to the Turkeyen Police Station.
Evidence presented during the trial showed that Hamid sustained injuries to her left thigh, left upper arm and right side of her breast. Her left eye was also swollen, along with her wrist and upper left arm. Her phone was shattered, and the apartment was reportedly badly damaged before Seeram left.
Seeram denied physically assaulting Hamid. He told the court that he merely pushed her as he attempted to leave the apartment and maintained that she was the aggressor.
He also alleged that Hamid had become upset and jealous after seeing him speaking to female foreign nationals at a popular entertainment bar the previous day.
In delivering her ruling, Magistrate Gibbs found Seeram’s evidence problematic on several material issues. She said he was evasive on material matters and professed an inability to understand certain questions during cross-examination. The court also found that the defence’s explanation for Hamid’s injuries was inconsistent.
The defence had suggested that Hamid had fallen while entering the apartment after a day of drinking. However, Seeram could not recall whether he had made such a claim in his statement to police and opted to rely on that statement. The court noted that the statement contained no such reference.
Magistrate Gibbs accepted that Seeram sustained injuries during the incident but rejected the explanation offered for how Hamid’s injuries were caused.
She found that the injuries could not have resulted from a single push and that the force used extended beyond that.
The magistrate also found Hamid to be a credible witness, noting that she had admitted to consuming alcohol the day before the incident.
Magistrate Gibbs said the injuries sustained by Hamid were consistent with the assault she described and that her evidence aligned with the logic of the case.
The court ultimately found that the prosecution had proven its case beyond reasonable doubt and that Seeram had not acted in self-defence.
He was therefore found guilty of assault causing actual bodily harm.
Following the verdict, Hughes asked Magistrate Gibbs to reconsider the decision to remand his client.
The attorney pointed to Seeram’s current position as National Coordinator of the Border Patrol Protection Unit, his national responsibilities and the fact that he had attended court on every occasion.
Prosecutor Ganesh Hira said the prosecution would be guided by the court’s decision but asked that, if Seeram were granted his liberty pending sentencing, he be required to report to police once weekly.
Magistrate Gibbs, however, said she was not satisfied with the explanation advanced by the defence and ordered Seeram remanded to prison.
His sentencing remains fixed for November 2 at 10:30 a.m., while his bid for bail will now be heard in the High Court on Monday.
Seeram was Region Four Chairman and a PNCR executive at the time of the 2023 incident. He has since left the PNCR and is now the National Border Patrol Director.
Discussion