The operator of a private hire company based at Keighley rail station has been stripped of his licence after a court heard Class A drug dealing took place on the premises.

Magistrates decided that Akmal Sakander, operator of Central Private Hire based in Keighley Rail Station, was not a “fit and proper person” to run a private hire business during a hearing at Bradford Magistrates' Court when it was heard heroin, cocaine and crack were allegedly being dealt “under his nose.”

The office had been raided by police last April following operations where undercover officers were allegedly dealt cocaine, heroin and crack cocaine by an individual in the company’s office.

An individual has since been charged with conspiracy to supply Class A drugs.

Mr Sakander had been stripped of his licence by Bradford MDC in May 2024; but Mr Sakander appealed this decision, which was heard on Thursday 6 February.

During the appeal, it was argued that he had no idea drug dealing was taking place on the premises, and that he should be allowed to continue operating the business.

But Bradford council argued that this inability to accept responsibility only proved he was not fit to run a private hire company.

The court heard that Mr Sakander had run the cab company for over 20 years, and also worked full time at nearby business Pennine Electrics, as well as operating a kitchen company.

There had been no issues with police in the lengthy period he ran Central Private Hire, Magistrates were told.

Although Mr Sakander spent most of his time working in his other job, he could access the company’s CCTV on his phone, and told the court that if any issues arose he could quickly be back at the office.

When he was called for a meeting with licensing officers a few weeks after the raid, Mr Sakander said he was shocked by the line of questioning, which he compared to an “interrogation.”

Referring to the claim that Sakander was shocked that his interview with the council led to him being questioned about drug dealing at the business, Mr Fowles said: “Your premises had been raided by police and a person arrested for dealing drugs on the premises.

"When you were invited to speak to the council, was it beyond your ability to guess it would be about drug dealing on your premises?

“You are the person with ultimate control, ultimate responsibility for ensuring the premises is being operated lawfully.

“During that period there was heroin, cocaine and crack being dealt from the premises. That is a massive failure on your part isn’t it?”

Sakander responded: “Not if I didn’t know about it.”

Mr Fowles replied: “It was happening under your nose. You having no idea it is going on despite being responsible for the business is a failure on your part isn’t it?

“Do you only think it’s a failure on your part if you had known about it?”

Sakander said: “How am I supposed to know someone was doing that? How am I supposed to know there was drug dealing on my premises?”

Mr Fowles replied: “That is your evidence to this court?”

Mr Sakander replied: “Yes.”

Magistrates were shown images of alleged drug dealing captured on the company’s CCTV.

Referring to the appellant’s claims that he could monitor CCTV from the business while working his other job, Mr Fowles said: “You claim that if you saw someone dealing drugs in the premises you’d do something about it. We’ve seen some images of alleged drug dealing on your premises and you did nothing about it.”

Mr Sakander said he saw moving images on his phone, and so it was difficult to tell what was happening in them.

Detective Sergeant Neil Kelman of West Yorkshire Police gave evidence at the hearing. He said the CCTV appeared to show a cocaine deal taking place.

Mr Ahmed for the defence, suggested that although a seasoned police officer may recognise a drug deal, his client may not.

He said: “Is it fair to say a lay person might not be able to guess what this image showed?”

DS Kelman replied: “I’d expect that the exchange of a block of white substance for a large amount of cash would be recognised.”

Summing up, Mr Fowles said: “The council revoked his licence because on his watch his premises were being used to deal in illegal drugs.

“The applicant has done nothing to prevent that state of affairs.

“As someone that allows their premises to be used for drug dealing and, in his own evidence, had no idea what was going on, is he really a suitable person to be trusted with a licence to operate a taxi firm?

“The refusal to accept responsibility is the basis for this applicant’s case.”

After a short deliberation Magistrates judged the council made the right decision to strip Mr Sakander of his licence and dismissed the appeal.

Mrs Coward, chair of the bench said: “You agree you had no knowledge of what was happening on the premises. You are not a fit and proper person to operate a business like this.”

He was also ordered to pay £5,890 costs.

• Share on Facebook
• Tweet about it