Jasmine Kumar

  • Year of Call 2009
  • Year of Higher Rights 2007

Instruct Jasmine



Jasmine is an experienced barrister that has recently diversified her practice to include family law. 

As a former Legal Adviser to the Justices in Derbyshire, experienced in both prosecuting and defending, Jasmine is a fully rounded lawyer in respect of the intricacies of the criminal justice system and the nuances of the Magistrates' Court.  

Admitted as a solicitor in 2006, obtained Higher Rights of Audience in All Proceedings in 2007 and called to the Bar in 2009, when Jasmine found her passion for advocacy. 

Jasmine has a very professional court manner, yet a down to earth manner with her clients which makes her an excellent advocate of choice. Jasmine has a reputation of carefully scrutinising the actions of those that work on behalf of the state and ensures that any interference with her client's fundamental Human Rights, be that their right to liberty, right to a fair trial or right to a private and family life, is both necessary and proportionate. 

Jasmine is Litigation and Public Access accredited by the Bar Council.

Jasmine is a member of the both the Family Law Bar Association and the Criminal Bar Association. 




Jasmine has defended in complex and serious allegations including, historic rape, indecent assault, sexual assault, assaults causing serious violence including wounding and GBH, armed robbery, aggravated burglary, riot, affray, arson, stalking, harassment and breaches of Protective Orders.

Jasmine was involved in the preparation of a VHCC case involving 18 defendants that were charged with facilitating illegal immigration; multi defendant drugs conspiracy cases involving the analysis of copious amounts of cell site and telephone evidence and serious public disorder at regulated football matches often captured on CCTV by undercover specialist police officers.

Jasmine has a keen eye for detail and excels in the cross examination of witnesses and the delivery of compelling closing speeches.

Jasmine is able to engage well with her lay and professional clients and takes a down to earth approach with her clients. She is fully aware of cultural and nationality aspects coming from a dual heritage background and is very adept in engaging with those that have learning disabilities and mental health disorders. Jasmine has been instrumental in some cases whereby intermediary assessments have been necessary and resulted in the discontinuance of proceedings.  Jasmine has also been heavily involved in cases where psychologists and psychiatrists have been required to prepare reports on fitness to plead and to comment on mental health and psychological disorders, often relevant in the mitigation of many serial and repeat offenders. 

Jasmine has prosecuted for the CPS, UK Boarder Force, National Probation Service and Police Forces. 

Jasmine has prosecuted regulatory offences on behalf of Trading Standards and local authorities: Equally she has defended regulatory offences prosecuted by various government departments and also less obvious authorities such as the Peak District National Park Authority.

Finally, Jasmine has appeared on several occasions, at the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division), with success. 




Jasmine has recently spent 14 months employed as in house counsel, attached to a legal 500 firm, exclusively in the Family Public Law department.

Her work included contesting applications for interim care orders, placement orders, secure accommodation orders and advising on leave to appeal adoption orders. 

Jasmine was heavily involved in the preparation of a VHCC public law case which incolved three non EU parents. Jasmine represented the father of the youngest child. The mother had pleaded guilty to assaulting her daughter and was sentenced to a suspended prison sentence during care proceedings. It was discovered by the local authority that the mother had concealed the existence of an older child in Romania who resided with a foster family. The local authority obtained assessments of family members undertaken in Romania, Albania and Greece. All assessments were negative. The case involved the potential separation of half siblings of different nationalities. The current foster carers were assessed for an SGO of the children, however, they did not wish to care for the youngest child under a final order at this stage as there were issues with his slow development. Therefore the local authority sought to keep both the children together in long term foster care. 

Jasmine represented a mother that sought the discharge of a placement order and revocation of care order: The mother was successful after a contested hearing (with the benefit of an intermediary) and the placement order was discharged, after the child had already met his prospective new adoptive family. The child remained in care with foster carers. The mother sought contact with a child in care. The mother had since had a second child in different area of the UK and therefore the case involved the interaction of two different local authorities that both had different views on the mother's ability to care for her sons. A second independent social worker was instructed. After the court approved a rehabilitation plan for the child to be returned to his parents, the parents were involved in a potential separation which caused the court to pause the rehabilitation plan as there were questions as to whether the mother, that suffered with a learning disabilitity, could care alone for the two children. The local authority was to then consider issuing another application for a placement order of the first child. 

Jasmine represented a father with autism that was in a relationship with his partner who gave birth in a toilet having not known that she was pregnant. An interim care order was granted under the condition that the family were placed in a residential setting where they were monitiored 24 hours a day for a period of 30 weeks during the national lockdowns. This was extrememley challenging for the parents. The local authority asserted that the parents concealed the pregnancy as the mother has lost her two previous children to adoption. The case concluded with the local authority withdrawing their assertion of the concealed pregnancy after detailed parental responses were prepared and the court imposed a supervision order and the family returned home. 

Jasmine provided advice and represention to those applying for or contesting Special Guardianship Orders.

Jasmine dealt with public law cases where issues regarding contact developed into private law disputes and also where fact finding hearings were necessary to resolve issues such as domestic violence, attempt rape, the imposition of a non molestation order and the causation of non accidental injuries against children. Jasmine was involved with one case that included up to 10 legal parties involving several children. 

Jasmine represented a mother at a final hearing whereby the local authority sought to apply for an "open adoption" in relation to one of four siblings. The mother's eldest daughter had been the victim of CSE, the mother and her daughter both gave evidence to secure criminal convictions. The mother was a very vulnerable client and was subject to both psychiatric and psychological assessments during proceedings. Although the mother acccepted that she could not care for the children, she opposed the adoption of her youngest son. The children remained together in long term foster care with no adoption order. Jasmine maintained an excellent and trusted working relationship with her client throughout this very emotional case.

Jasmine is keen to develop her private law experience especially in relation to serious allegations that require resolution through fact finding hearings. Jasmine brings her forensic cross examination skills from the Crown court to the Family court.