Ismail and Another v Public Prosecutor

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judge: Tan Ah Tah FJ
• Judgment Date: 19 January 1967
• Neutral Citation: [1967] SGFC 1
• Date: 19 January 1967
• Docket Number: Criminal Appeal No Y10 of 1966
• Published date: 19 September 2003
• Defendant Counsel: Tay Soo Tee (Deputy Public Prosecutor)
• Court: Federal Court (Singapore)
• Plaintiff Counsel: Dato' David Marshall

The appellants were convicted in the High Court on the following two charges:

1 That you

(1) Ismail bin Jalil

(2) Ayob bin Sarip

on or about 29 August 1965 at about 11.30am in front of No 268 Bukit Timah Road, Singapore, in furtherance of the common intention of you both, did wrongfully confine one Tan Yew Lye in a motor-car No SL 9991 and thereby committed an offence punishable under s 342 read with s 34 of the Penal Code (Cap 119).

2 That you

(1) Ismail bin Jalil

(2) Ayob bin Sarip

are charged that you, on or about 29 August 1965 at about 11.30am along Cavenagh Road, Singapore, in furtherance of the common intention of you both, committed robbery of cash $300 in the possession of one Tan Yew Lye, and at the time of committing the said robbery one of you was armed with a deadly weapon, to wit, a revolver, and thereby committed an offence punishable under s 392 and 397 read with s 34 of the Penal Code (Cap 119).

They were each sentenced to one year`s imprisonment on the first charge and eight years` imprisonment on the second charge, the sentences to run concurrently. They now appeal against their convictions and their sentences.

The facts in this appeal present some extraordinary and unusual features. Both appellants are detective police constables and both were on 29 August 1965 attached to the Queenstown Police Station. On that day, a Sunday, at 3.45pm one Tan Yew Lye, the complainant in the case, made a report at the Kandang Kerbau Police Station stating that at about 11.30 that morning while coming out of a shop with $500 which he had just collected from the shop he was approached by two Malays and asked for his identity card. He produced it after they had told him that they were from `Government Service.` They then took his identity card and told him to follow them into a red Austin car No SL 9991. While he was in the car with them one of them checked his pocket and took $300 and at about 12.15pm they dropped him off at Rochore Canal Road.

Inspector Steven Salay who was then on duty at the Kandang Kerbau Police Station, and to whom this report was immediately referred, ascertained who was the owner of the car SL 9991 through the Registrar of Vehicle`s Office and that same evening traced the owner and seized the car in question from the petrol kiosk at the junction of Joo Chiat Road and Joo Chiat Place.

The car had been hired out at 10.30 the same morning to two Malays who had come to the petrol kiosk to hire a car which they returned about two hours later. The car owner`s assistant had written down in a note book the name and address of the hirer and the number of the driving licence produced by one of the two Malays. The number of the driving licence recorded was 16801/60. Inspector Steven Salay took possession of the note book and the car at about 9.55pm that evening.

The following day this inspector held an identification parade at the Kandang Kerbau Police Station and the complainant picked out the first appellant. From the first appellant the inspector took possession of a duplicate driving licence issued to him and a revolver and muzzle cap and a pocket book. The entry in the first appellant`s pocket book records that between 8am and 2.30pm on 29 August 1965 he was at home. Inspector Salay checked this alibi and recorded statements from the first appellant`s wife and mother.

On 18 September 1965 another inspector, Gurdev Singh, took over the investigation of the case but it was not until 11 October 1965 that the first appellant was brought before a court and charged. The following day Inspector Gurdev Singh arrested the second appellant and held an identification parade at the Geylang Police Station at which the complainant picked out the second appellant.

At the trial the complainant testified that having been sent by his employer Ng Cheng Kang he went on his motor cycle to a shop Chop Gee Chang in Bukit Timah Road to collect some money. On arrival at that shop he parked his motor cycle on the roadside next to the pavement, went into the shop, saw the proprietor Tan Choon Kiat, identified himself to the proprietor and was given $500 in $50 denominations to deliver to his employer. Having counted the money he put $300 in his right trousers pocket and $200 in his left hip pocket, left the shop and went to his parked motor cycle. He was pushing his motor cycle when two Malays, whom he did not know, walked towards him and asked for his identity card which he produced. The two Malays were the appellants in this case. The first appellant took his identity card, told him to park his motor cycle and to follow them. He asked their identity and they said they were `Government men`. He followed them for some distance and was asked to get into a small red Austin car parked on the road. He got in, sat at the rear off-side of the car with the second appellant on his left, the first appellant took the driver`s seat and drove the car away. The car turned into Cavenagh Road and slowed down and at this stage the second appellant searched his body, felt his right trousers pocket, asked him what were the contents of that pocket and on being told it was money tried to put his hand into that pocket. When the...