Mohamed Razip v Public Prosecutor Rosli Bin Amat v Public Prosecutor Kambali Bin Takiran v Public Prosecutor

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judge: Punch Coomaraswamy J
• Judgment Date: 01 October 1987
• Neutral Citation: [1987] SGCA 15
• Citation: [1987] SGCA 15
• Date: 01 October 1987
• Published date: 19 September 2003
• Plaintiff Counsel: S Vellupillai (Donaldson & Burkinshaw),Peter Fernando (Leo Fernando),N Vijaykumar (Vijay & Co)
• Docket Number: Criminal Appeals Nos 3, 4 and 5 of 1986
• Defendant Counsel: Bala Reddy (Deputy Public Prosecutor)
• Court: Court of Appeal (Singapore)
• Year: 1987

Cur Adv Vult

(delivering the judgment of the court): Factual background

The three accused in these Criminal Appeals were charged with the offence of rape under s 376 of the Penal Code. Rape is a non-bailable offence, as provided in Sch A to the Criminal Procedure Code. The preliminary inquiry into charges was held in the Subordinate Courts on 19 December 1985 at the conclusion of which the accused were committed for trial in the High Court.

Counsel for each of the accused then applied, by way of criminal motions, to the High Court for the accused to be admitted to bail pending their trial. These applications were made pursuant to what is now s 354 of the Criminal Procedure Code (1985 Rev Ed). (All references to statutory provisions hereinafter shall be to the 1985 Rev Ed of the Statutes.) The applications came before Sinnathuray J who refused to grant bail but directed an early trial instead.

The three accused appealed against the decision of the learned judge. We dismissed all the appeals. We now give our reasons.

Is an order on a bail application appealable?

Section 354 of the Criminal Procedure Code is as follows:

(1) The High Court may, in any case whether there is an appeal on conviction or not, direct that any person shall be admitted to bail or that the bail required by a police officer or Magistrate`s Court or District Court shall be reduced or increased.

(2) The High Court may at any stage of any proceeding under this Code cause any person who has been released under this section to be arrested and may commit him to custody.

In Singapore, there is no general right of appeal in criminal cases except such as is provided by law. This is made clear by s 241 Criminal Procedure Code which provides:

No appeal shall lie from a judgment, sentence or order of a criminal court except as provided for by this Code or by any other law for the time being in force.

The Criminal Procedure Code contains no provision for an appeal against an order of the High Court made under s 354 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The appellants can only appeal under `any other law for the time being in force.

We now turn to the Supreme Court of Judicature Act. Section 44, which spells out the jurisdiction of the Court of Criminal Appeal to entertain appeals from the High Court, reads:

(1) The Court of Criminal Appeal shall have jurisdiction to hear and determine any appeal against any decision made by the High Court in the exercise of its original criminal jurisdiction, subject nevertheless to the provisions of this Act or any other written law regulating the terms and conditions upon which such appeals may be brought.

(2) An appeal by a person convicted shall be either against the conviction or against the sentence or against both: Provided that where an accused person has pleaded guilty and been convicted on such plea there shall be no appeal except as to the extent or legality of the sentence.

(3) An appeal by the Public Prosecutor shall be either against the acquittal of an accused person or against the sentence imposed upon an accused person by the High Court.

(4) An appeal may lie on a question of fact or a question of law or on a question of mixed fact and law.

(5) The Court of Criminal Appeal shall also have jurisdiction to hear and determine matters brought before it in accordance with section 59 or 66.

Sections 59 and 60 of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322) have no relevance to the proceedings before us. The key words in s 44(1) are `any decision made by the High Court in the exercise of its original criminal jurisdiction`.

Section 44, before it was repealed and substituted in its present form by the Supreme Court of Judicature (Amendment) Act 1973, was in the following terms:

(1) The Court of Criminal Appeal shall have jurisdiction to hear and determine any appeal by a person convicted by the High Court in the exercise of its original criminal jurisdiction, subject nevertheless to the provisions of this or any other written law regulating the terms and conditions upon which such appeals may be brought.

(2) An appeal by a person convicted shall be either against the conviction or against the sentence or against both: Provided that where an accused person has pleaded guilty and been convicted on such plea there shall be no appeal except as to the extent or legality of the sentence.

(3) An appeal may he on a question of fact or a question of law or on a question of mixed fact and law.

(4) The Court shall also have jurisdiction to hear and determine matters brought before it in accordance with the provisions of ss 58, 59...