Public Prosecutor v Galing Anak Kujat and another
Court | High Court (Singapore) |
Judge | Kan Ting Chiu J |
Judgment Date | 30 July 2010 |
Neutral Citation | [2010] SGHC 212 |
Citation | [2010] SGHC 212 |
Docket Number | Criminal Case No 31 of 2009 |
Hearing Date | 27 July 2009,20 July 2009,23 July 2009,24 July 2009,29 July 2009,30 July 2009,31 July 2009,21 July 2009,28 July 2009,22 July 2009 |
Plaintiff Counsel | Leong Wing Tuck and Gordon Oh (Deputy Public Prosecutors) |
Defendant Counsel | Chandra Mohan s/o K Nair (Tan Rajah & Cheah) and Chia Soo Michael (Sankar Ow & Partners),Johan Ismail (Johan Ismail & Co) and Zaminder Singh Gill (Hilborne & Co) |
Subject Matter | Criminal Law |
Published date | 19 October 2011 |
On the night of 17 February 2008, two persons, Wu Jun and Cao Ruyin were walking along a pathway in an open space near Geylang Drive after their dinner. Whilst they were making their way peacefully, they were set upon by the two accused persons, Galing Anak Kujat (“Galing”) and Jabing Kho (“Jabing”).
Cao Ruyin (“the deceased”) suffered severe head injuries, which led to his death on 23 February 2008, and was also robbed of his handphone. Wu Jun escaped with minor injuries.
Galing and Jabing were prosecuted before me on the charge that they:
[o]n or about the 17
th day of February 2008, at about 8.19 p.m., at the open space near Geylang Drive, Singapore ... in furtherance of the common intention of both of [them], committed murder by doing an act which caused the death of one Cao Ruyin, male 40 years old, which death took place on 23 February 2008, and [they] have thereby committed an offence punishable under section 302 read with section 34 of the Penal Code, Chapter 224.
Galing and Jabing were not arrested for several days after the assault. The records of the deceased’s handphone enabled the police to conduct investigations and arrest the two accused persons and their friends.
There were only three persons who gave direct evidence of the attack, namely, Wu Jun, and the two accused persons. At the trial, the prosecution tendered in evidence seven statements taken from Galing and six statements from Jabing. All these statements were admitted in evidence without objection.
Galing’s statements Statement dated 26 February 2008The first statement recorded from Galing was recorded by Senior Station Inspector Razali bin Razak (“SSI Razali”). In this statement1 Galing recounted that:
On 17/02/2008 at about 10:00 pm plus, my friends namely Vincent, Jabing, two Sarawak guys whose name I could not remember and I walked along Lorong 4 Geylang going to Lorong 12 Geylang for drink. Whilst we were walking along the road, suddenly Jabing cross the road. Seeing this, I also crossed the road to follow him while the others did not cross the road. Jabing then told me to look at two male Chinese walking beside the road. I then asked Jabing what we are going to do. Jabing replied that we robbed the two male Chinese. I told Jabing not to do it. Jabing did not reply and just walked behind the two male Chinese. I then saw Jabing took a piece of wood near a tree. After a few steps, Jabing used the wood to hit on the male Chinese who has a bigger built on his head. The other smaller male Chinese wanted to beat Jabing and I approached the smaller Chinese and took out the belt that I was wearing belonging to my friend and used the belt to beat the smaller male Chinese at his face.
A cautioned statement was recorded from Galing later on the same day in response to a charge that he, Vencent Anak Anding and three other persons had murdered the deceased. The statement2 reads:
Investigation statements recorded on 3, 4 and 6 March 20083I do not have the intention to commit murder but my friend Jabing was too violent when hitting the Chinese man until he bled profusely. I saw him hitting the Chinese man several times and his head cracked open. Jabing used a piece of wood which he picked up from the road side. While the Chinese man was holding his head, I took a handphone from his waist pouch. When I was taking this handphone, Jabing chased after another Chinese man. This man is thin. I shouted at Jabing to stop chasing the Chinese man. He stopped, and we took the overhead bridge to join three other friends who were across the road. I suggested to the four of them to follow me to Lor 24 Geylang for drinks. We drank about six bottles of Tiger Beer. Before we started drinking I told them that I wanted to sell the handphone. My friend Vencent then informed me that he would keep the handphone and advance a sum of three hundred dollars. He took out three hundred dollars and gave it to me. I told Vencent that I will return three hundred dollars to him and collect the phone back when I have the money. I gave fifty dollars each to Vencent, Jabing and two other friends. I do not know their names. I also used some of the money to pay for the bottles of beer. I wish to say again that I have no intention to kill the Chinese man. I did not expect the Chinese man to die. I really regretted that Jabing hit him so many times until he died. I am sorry. I have no intention to kill him.
The Investigation Officer of the case, Senior Station Inspector Zainal Abidin Ismail (“SSI Zainal”) recorded investigation statements from Galing on 3, 4 and 6 March 2008 with the service of a Malay interpreter, Marriana. In these statements Galing recounted that on 17 February 2008, Vencent had proposed to him that they rob two Bangladeshi persons. Galing agreed, and went to Tiong Bahru where the robbery was to take place. Other persons, namely, Jabing and Anthony Anak Jaban also agreed to join them in the scheme. The robbery was aborted because the group could not find the two targets. Another person, Alan Anak Ajan, joined the group, and they consumed liquor known as “Narcissus Ginseng Wine Tonic”.
Eventually they left Tiong Bahru and went to Geylang. Galing stated that his intention was to meet some friends there and to drink with them. Galing’s account of the events that followed merits reproduction:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Kho Jabing v Public Prosecutor
...of murder, and was sentenced to suffer the then mandatory punishment of death: see Public Prosecutor v Galing Anak Kujat and another [2010] SGHC 212 (“HC (Conviction)”) (the said Galing Anak Kujat in this case report was the Applicant’s co-accused at the trial). The Applicant’s appeal again......
-
Kho Jabing and another v Public Prosecutor
...of the Court): Introduction This is an appeal from the decision of the trial judge in Public Prosecutor v Galing Anak Kujat and another [2010] SGHC 212 (the “GD”), where the learned trial judge convicted Galing Anak Kujat (“Galing”) and Jabing Kho (“Jabing”) (collectively “the appellants”) ......
-
Kho Jabing v Public Prosecutor
...of murder, and was sentenced to suffer the then mandatory punishment of death: see Public Prosecutor v Galing Anak Kujat and another [2010] SGHC 212 (“HC (Conviction)”) (the said Galing Anak Kujat in this case report was the Applicant’s co-accused at the trial). The Applicant’s appeal again......
-
PP v Kho Jabing
.... Kho Jabing v PP [2011] 3 SLR 634 (refd) Panya Martmontree v PP [1995] 2 SLR (R) 806; [1995] 3 SLR 341 (refd) PP v Galing Anak Kujat [2010] SGHC 212 (refd) PP v Law Aik Meng [2007] 2 SLR (R) 814; [2007] 2 SLR 814 (refd) Sia Ah Kew v PP [1974-1976] SLR (R) 54; [1972-1974] SLR 208 (folld) Si......