Public Prosecutor v Chew Kim Soon

CourtMagistrates' Court (Singapore)
JudgeWong Li Tien
Judgment Date10 June 2004
Neutral Citation[2004] SGMC 5
Citation[2004] SGMC 5
Publication Date14 June 2004
Plaintiff CounselINSP A. Majeed Yusoff
Defendant CounselMr Mervyn Tan (Mervyn Tan and Co)

10 June 2004

Magistrate Wong Li Tein:

1 This is an appeal against sentence by Chew Kim Soon (“the accused”) for an offence under section 353 of the Penal Code (Chapter 224) (“section 353”). The accused pleaded guilty before me on 3 May 2004 to the charge as follows:



NRIC No. S0056959-C

are charged that you, on the 13th day of June 2003, at about 10.50pm, along North Bridge Road, Singapore, which is a public place, did use criminal force towards a public servant, one Edmund Tan, a Police Sergeant, with intent to deter that person from discharging his duty as such public servant, to wit, by pushing him, and you have thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 353 of the Penal Code, Chapter 224.”

2 I ascertained that the accused understood the nature and consequences of his plea. He also admitted without any qualifications to the amended Statement of Facts (marked “P2”).

Statement of Facts

3 The facts revealed that on 13 June 2003 at about 10.45pm, Mr Edmund Tan Kang Poh (“Sgt Tan”), a police sergeant, was driving a police vehicle along North Bridge Road with his partner. Suddenly, the vehicle driven by the accused cut into his lane. Sgt Tan sounded his horn at the accused and the accused drove his vehicle back into his original lane.

4 When both vehicles reached the traffic junction, Sgt Tan sounded his horn at the accused and signalled for the accused to pull over at the side of the road. The accused did so and Sgt Tan then approached him for his identity card and driver’s licence. The accused handed these documents to him. While Sgt Tan was waiting for his partner to take a breath analyser test from the accused, he was involved in a verbal exchange with the accused. The accused moved towards Sgt Tan and pushed him in the chest. The accused was subsequently placed under arrest.

Charge Taken into Consideration

5 The accused also admitted to and consented for the second charge (MAC 9076/2003) against him under the same section of the Penal Code to be taken into consideration for purposes of sentencing. The second charge stated that he had used abusive language against the same police sergeant, namely Sgt Tan, during the execution of his duty as a public servant.

Antecedents and Mitigation

6 The accused has three previous convictions. He was convicted for inconsiderate driving in 1979 and mischief in 1982. He was convicted for an offence under section 67(1)(b) of the Road Traffic Act for driving under the influence of alcohol on 10 February 2004 and fined $2,200.00 with a ban from driving all classes of vehicles for 2 years. This third previous conviction was for an offence which occurred at the same date, time and place as the current offence which the accused faced before me.

7 Counsel for Defence tendered written mitigation submissions (marked “B”) to the Court. He highlighted that the accused had over-reacted to Sgt Tan’s questioning as he felt that those questions were directed at his wife, who is a Chinese national. He felt the need to...

To continue reading

Request your trial

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