Mah Kiat Seng v Public Prosecutor

JudgeChoo Han Teck J
Judgment Date28 October 2010
Neutral Citation[2010] SGHC 320
Citation[2010] SGHC 320
CourtHigh Court (Singapore)
Published date29 October 2010
Docket NumberMagistrate’s Appeal No 184 of 2010 (DAC No 62538 and 62539 of 2009)
Plaintiff CounselAppellant in-person
Defendant CounselMohamed Faizal (Deputy Public Prosecutor)
Subject MatterCriminal Law
Hearing Date15 October 2010,18 October 2010
Choo Han Teck J:

The appellant was taken to the Bedok Police Station on 17 July 2009 when he was arrested and charged for the offence of voluntarily causing grievous hurt, an offence under s 325 of the Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed). When asked to have his finger impressions and photograph taken, he refused. He was thus charged under s 13(2)(a) of the Registration of Criminals Act (Cap 268, 1985 Rev Ed) (“the Act”). He also refused to provide a blood sample when requested to do so. For this he was charged under s 13E(5)(a) of the Act. The appellant was tried and at the end of the five-day trial he was convicted on both charges and was fined $500 on each charge. The appellant appealed against the convictions but not on the sentences imposed.

At the appeal before me, DPP Mr Mohamed Faizal conceded that the conviction regarding the charge under s 13E(5)(a) cannot be sustained because certain procedure was not complied with. Under ss 13C(1) and (2) of the Act, if a person without good cause refuses to provide a blood sample, that person may be taken before a Magistrate who may then make an order for that person’s blood to be taken. Such an order was, however, not obtained and so it could not be said that the appellant had been “lawfully required” to provide his blood sample. Section 13E(5)(a) of the Act was thus not applicable. Sections 13C(1) and (2) of the Act provide as follows: — (1) No sample of blood shall be taken from a person who is arrested and accused of a crime unless the appropriate consent is given for the taking of the sample. If the appropriate consent required under subsection (1) for the taking of a sample of blood from a person is refused without good cause or cannot be obtained despite all reasonable efforts, that person may be taken before a Magistrate and the Magistrate may, if satisfied that there is reasonable cause to believe that the sample may confirm or disprove whether that person was involved in committing the crime, order that the person provide the sample required. and Section 13E(5)(a) provides as follows:

(5) Where a person from whom a body sample is lawfully required under this Part refuses, without reasonable excuse, to give the sample or to allow the sample to be taken from him, or otherwise hinders or obstructs the taking of the sample from him —

(a) that person shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $1,000 or to imprisonment for...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Mah Kiat Seng v Public Prosecutor
    • Singapore
    • Court of Appeal (Singapore)
    • 30 May 2011
    ...have his finger impressions and photograph taken. The Judge’s decision in MA 184/2010 can be found at Mah Kiat Seng v Public Prosecutor [2010] SGHC 320 (“MKS v PP (MA)”). MKS then applied to the High Court in Criminal Motion No 42 of 2010 (“CM 42/2010”) to reserve 22 questions of law of pub......
  • Mah Kiat Seng v Public Prosecutor
    • Singapore
    • High Court (Singapore)
    • 1 March 2011
    ...first and dismissed the other. The facts and my grounds of decision of those appeals are set out in Mah Kiat Seng v Public Prosecutor [2010] SGHC 320. The relevant facts of this application concerned his refusal to give his finger impressions to the police after he was arrested on suspicion......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT