Public Prosecutor v AUB
Jurisdiction | Singapore |
Judge | Tay Yong Kwang J |
Judgment Date | 26 June 2015 |
Neutral Citation | [2015] SGHC 166 |
Court | High Court (Singapore) |
Docket Number | Criminal Case No 30 of 2015 |
Published date | 30 June 2015 |
Year | 2015 |
Hearing Date | 27 May 2015 |
Plaintiff Counsel | David Khoo and Joshua Lim (Attorney-General's Chambers) |
Defendant Counsel | Amarjit Singh and Javern Sim (Gloria James-Civetta & Co) |
Subject Matter | Criminal Law,Offences,Sexual assault by penetration |
Citation | [2015] SGHC 166 |
The accused is a male Singaporean who is now 47 years old. He pleaded guilty to the following two charges:
That you, [AUB],
|
|
|
|
He also admitted the following offence and consented that it be taken into consideration for the purpose of sentence:
|
|
The punishments provided by law in respect of the first charge are imprisonment of not less than eight years and not more than 20 years and caning of not less than 12 strokes. The offence in the second charge is punishable with a fine not exceeding $10,000 or imprisonment not exceeding five years or both for a first offender.
I sentenced the accused to 12 years’ imprisonment and 12 strokes of the cane for the first charge and to 1 year’s imprisonment in respect of the second charge. I ordered both imprisonment terms to run consecutively with effect from 23 July 2014, the date of remand.
The Statement of FactsThe accused admitted all the facts set out in the following statement of facts:
THE ACCUSED
THE VICTIM
FIRST INFORMATION REPORT
FACTS PERTAINING TO THE OFFENCE OF SEXUAL ASSAULT BY PENETRATION
FACTS PERTAINING TO THE OFFENCE OF COMMITTING AN OBSCENE ACT ON 26 FEBRUARY 2013
THE ARREST
POLICE INVESTIGATIONS
To continue reading
Request your trial-
BPH v Public Prosecutor and another appeal
...position which would have justified prospective overruling as the High Court relied on an earlier decision in Public Prosecutor v AUB [2015] SGHC 166 in coming to its decision. Conclusion on the BPH For the foregoing reasons, we did not think that the arguments made on behalf of BPH had any......
-
Public Prosecutor v BLV
...Prosecution urged the Court to impose a sentence of 15 years’ imprisonment and 12 strokes of the cane. Citing Public Prosecutor v AUB [2015] SGHC 166 (“PP v AUB”) and Public Prosecutor v Yap Weng Wah [2015] 3 SLR 297, the Prosecution drew an analogy with the offence of sexual assault by pen......
-
Pram Nair v Public Prosecutor
...should be the same as that for rape, for two reasons. We set out his holding in full: 56 Like Tay J in AUB [Public Prosecutor v AUB [2015] SGHC 166], I am of the view that victims of sexual assault by penetration experience the same emotional scars as rape victims. Furthermore, the act of i......
-
PP v Pram Nair
...(refd) Juraimi bin Mohd Sharif v PP MA 519/1993 (refd) Lee Foo Choong Kelvin v PP [1999] 3 SLR(R) 292; [1999] 4 SLR 318 (distd) PP v AUB [2015] SGHC 166 (folld) PP v GBA [2015] SGDC 168 (not folld) PP v Muhammad Fadly bin Abdull Wahab [2016] SGHC 160 (refd) PP v Muhammad Hazly bin Mohamad H......