Adrian Tan Chun v Public Prosecutor

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judge: Victor Yeo Khee Eng
• Judgment Date: 19 March 2001
• Neutral Citation: [2001] SGMC 12
• Year: 2001
• Published date: 19 September 2003
• Citation: [2001] SGMC 12
• Court: Magistrates' Court (Singapore)

JUDGMENT:

Grounds of Decision

This is an appeal against sentence by the accused. The accused, Adrian Tan Chun, 28 years old, pleaded guilty to two charges of intending to insult the modesty of a woman, an offence under section 509 of the Penal Code (Chapter 224), and one charge of voluntarily causing hurt under section 323 of the Penal Code (Chapter 224). Another charge of criminal trespass under section 447 of the Penal Code (Chapter 224) was taken into consideration for the purpose of sentencing.

2. The offences in respect of MAC 6433/2000 and MAC 7053/2000 were committed on 20^th September 2000 at the 4^th floor ladies toilet at Upper Serangoon Shopping Centre in that the accused did:

"intrude upon the privacy of one Ng Leng Poh, female 32 years old, with intention to insult her modesty, by peeping at her urinating" (Exhibit P1A); and

"voluntarily caused hurt to Ng Leng Poh by kicking her on her thighs, stomach, legs and pulled her hands" (Exhibit P2).

3. The offence in respect of MAC 8772/2000 was committed on 18^th December 2000 at the 2^nd floor ladies toilet at International Plaza in that the accused did:

"intrude upon the privacy of one Oh Hwee Hian, female 29 years old, intending to insult her modesty, by peeping at her whilst she was urinating inside a cubicle" (Exhibit P3A).

4. The punishment prescribed for an offence under section 509 of Penal Code was imprisonment of up to one year, or with fine, or both. The punishment prescribed for an offence under section 323 of the Penal Code was imprisonment of up to one year, or fine of up to $1,000/-, or with both.

5. I sentenced the accused to four months imprisonment for the charge in MAC 6043/2000, three months imprisonment for the charge in MAC 7053/2000 and eight months imprisonment for the charge in MAC 8772/2000. I further ordered the terms of imprisonment to run consecutively, a total of 15 months imprisonment with effect from 19^th December 2000. I now give my reasons for the decision.

Statement of Facts

6. The accused admitted to both Statement of Facts (Exhibit A and A-1) in respect of the three proceeding charges without qualifications and accordingly, I convicted him on all the charges.

7. The first Statement of Facts (Exhibit A) which related to the charges in MAC 6433/2000 and 7053/2000 revealed that on 20^th December 2000 at about 8.05 pm, when the first victim, Ng Leng Poh was about to enter the ladies toilet at the 4^th floor of Upper Serangoon Shopping Centre, she saw the accused, who was walking ahead of her, turned around and looked at her from outside the mens toilet. The first victim then went into the third cubicle of the ladies toilet to urinate.

8. When she was urinating, she heard the accused entered the toilet and went into the second cubicle beside the cubicle she was occupying. The accused had peeped at her from the second cubicle, as when she looked-up, she saw a pair of hands grabbing at the top of the partition separating the second and third cubicles. The first victim then shouted loudly at the accused, whereupon he moved his hands away from the top of the partition.

9. When the first victim came out of the cubicle, she saw that there was no one in the ladies toilet and the accused was walking out of the ladies toilet. She confronted the accused and prevented him from leaving the toilet by grabbing his shirt. However, the accused struggled and kicked the first victim on her thighs, stomach and legs. He also pulled the first victims hands.

10. The medical report of Ng Leng Poh revealed that she suffered from several bruises on her right forearm and thighs, and abrasions on her left wrist, right hand and palm. There was also mild tenderness and pain on the lower quadrant of her abdominal wall. She was given oral and topical painkillers and outpatient medical leave from 21^st to 23^rd September 2000. (Exhibit B)

11. The second Statement of Fact (Exhibit A-1) which related to MAC 8772/2000 revealed that on 18^th December 2000 at about 3.10 pm, when the second victim Oh Hwee Hian was urinating inside the 2^nd floor ladies toilet at International Plaza, she noticed the accused peeping into the cubicle occupied by her.

12. The second victim felt annoyed and shouted at the accused, and immediately came out from the cubicle to seek assistance. When she walked out of the ladies toilet, the accused came out from the cubicle and wanted to leave. However, the second victim managed to stop him and detained him with the assistance of an unknown male passer-by. The accused was subsequently brought to the security office and the police were alerted.

13. Upon the arrival of the police, the accused was placed under arrest after Oh Hwee Hian identified the accused as the culprit who had peeped at her in the cubicle.

Antecedents

14. The accused admitted to the following antecedents:

28/03/1994 - Fine $1,000/- for insulting the modesty of a woman;

28/07/1994 - Fine $1,000/- for wilful trespass on property;

06/09/1995 - Fine $2,000/- for loitering with intent (two counts);

20/11/1995 - Fine $2,000/- and eight weeks imprisonment for loitering with intent;

22/04/1996 - Fine $2,000/- for simple theft;

12/03/1998 - Fine $2,000/- for insulting the modesty of a woman;

Three months imprisonment for possession of offensive instruments;

Fine $500/- for criminal trespass;

(Two charges of insulting the modesty of a woman were taken into consideration for sentencing.)

06/04/1999 - Fine $4,000/- for insulting the modesty of a woman;

(A charge of insulting the modest of a woman and criminal trespass was taken into consideration for sentencing.)

17/09/1999 - Ten weeks imprisonment for loitering with intent;

04/02/2000 - Nine months imprisonment for outraging the modesty of a woman;

Two months imprisonment for doing an obscene act in public;

(Sentences to run consecutively, total of 11 months imprisonment.)

Mitigation

15. In mitigation, counsel submitted that the accused had pleaded guilty and saved the victims the trauma of going through a trial. Counsel also submitted that the accused suffered from a psychological disorder and required lengthy periods of treatment. In this regard, counsel relied on five psychological reports from Woodbridge Hospital on the accused prepared between 26^th...