Public Prosecutor v Akhtar Hussain Mann

• Judge: Kan Ting Chiu JC
• Judgment Date: 16 May 1991
• Neutral Citation: [1991] SGHC 66
• Citation: [1991] SGHC 66
• Defendant Counsel: Harry Tan (Donaldson & Burkinshaw)
• Published date: 19 September 2003
• Plaintiff Counsel: Jennifer Marie (Deputy Public Prosecutor)
• Date: 16 May 1991
• Docket Number: Magistrate's Appeal No 211/90/01
• Court: High Court (Singapore)
• Subject Matter: Sentencing,Sentence -Special circumstances of the case,Criminal Procedure and Sentencing,s 43(3) Road Traffic Act (Cap 276),Forms of punishment,Words and Phrases,Offences,Fine or custodial sentence,Special circumstances of the case,Riding whilst under disqualification,'Special circumstances of the case',Primary consideration,Road Traffic

Cur Adv Vult

This is an appeal by the public prosecutor against the sentence passed on the respondent on his conviction of an offence under s 43(3) of the Road Traffic Act (Cap 276) (`the Act`). The sentence under appeal is a fine of $1,000. The appellant argued that a custodial sentence should have been imposed.

The offence of which the respondent was convicted and sentenced is for driving whilst under disqualification. The charge against him reads:

You, Akhtar Hussain Mann are charged that on 23 March 1989 at about 3pm along Commonwealth Avenue West Singapore, did ride motor cycle No FE 6809Y whilst you were being disqualified by the Magistrate Court No 23 from riding all class 2B, 2A and 2 vehicle for a period of one year wef 18 April 1988 to 17 April 1989 and you have thereby committed an offence punishable under s 43(3) of the Road Traffic Act (Cap 276).

Section 43(3) of the Act reads:

If any person who under the provisions of this Act is disqualified from holding or obtaining a driving licence applies for or obtains a driving licence while he is so disqualified or if any such person while he is so disqualified drives a motor vehicle, or if the disqualification is limited to the driving of a motor vehicle of a particular class or description a motor vehicle of that class or description, on a road, that person shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction -

(a) to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months;

(b) (if the court thinks that having regard to the special circumstances of the case it is not necessary to impose a sentence of imprisonment for the offence) to a fine not exceeding $1,000; or

(c) to both,

and a driving licence obtained by any person disqualified as aforesaid shall be of no effect.

The magistrate in his grounds of decision explained that:

I did not impose any custodial sentence as I was then of the view that the mitigating circumstances pleaded by the accused amounted to special circumstances under the Act. The prosecution did not address the court on this issue of special circumstances. I took into account the fact that the accused was a first offender and in a month`s time he would be studying in the university. An imprisonment term may affect the accused`s university studies. The accused had also committed the offence towards the end of the disqualification period.

It should be noted that the magistrate was clearly mistaken in describing the respondent as a first offender.

The issues to be determined in this appeal are firstly, what `special circumstances of the case` encompasses and secondly, whether there are any such special circumstances on the facts.

There are no reported decisions from Singapore or Malaysia on the meaning of the phrase. There are decisions on the `special reasons` for not ordering disqualification for the offences of driving under the influence of drink and for driving without insurance cover (see s 67(2) of the Act and s 3(2) of the Motor Vehicles (Third-Party Risks and Compensation) Act (Cap 189)) which must be considered.

Rex v Lim Kian Soo [1950] MLJ 181 is the first reported decision. This was a special case before the High Court of Singapore (Murray-Aynsley CJ, Evans and Storr JJ). The question before the court was the meaning of the words `unless the court for special reasons thinks fit to order otherwise` in s 48(2) of the Road Traffic Ordinance 1941, relating to the offence of driving without insurance cover.

...