Public Prosecutor v Lim Hock Hin

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judge: MPH Rubin J
• Judgment Date: 15 July 2002
• Neutral Citation: [2002] SGHC 145
• Date: 15 July 2002
• Subject Matter: Mentally-impaired accused,Culpable homicide not amounting to murder,Criminal Procedure and Sentencing,Sentencing,Appropriate sentence,Primary concerns for mentally impaired accused in such offence,s 304(a) Penal Code (Cap 224),When life imprisonment appropriate
• Docket Number: Criminal Case No 33 of 2002
• Published date: 19 September 2003
• Defendant Counsel: Joseph Theseira (Naidu Mohan & Theseira)
• Court: High Court (Singapore)
• Plaintiff Counsel: Jaswant Singh and Hwong Meng Jet (Deputy Public Prosecutors)

impaired his better judgment and control. Dr Phang added that however impaired though the accused’s judgment might have been at and around the material time, he still retained sufficient mental capacity to be capable of forming an intent to cause the injuries in question. Dr Phang noted that the accused had a history of epilepsy dating back to 1983 and his seizures were not optimally controlled in spite of treatment, with recurrences on a regular basis. The accused would have a predilection towards behaving violently and dangerously when in an epileptic seizure. Dr Phang concluded that the accused would require treatment and close follow-up on a permanent basis.

The accused pleaded guilty and was convicted for the offence of committing culpable homicide not amounting to murder under s 304(a) of the Penal Code, Cap 224. The sole issue before the court was what was the appropriate sentence to be imposed in this case where the accused was found to be suffering from a mental condition which required treatment on a permanent basis.

Held,

imposing a sentence of life imprisonment

(1) In relation to the sentence to be imposed, attention was drawn to the sentences imposed by the High Court in eight recent cases. It would appear from the cases that the courts have imposed sentences of life imprisonment in similar situations where mentally impaired offenders were convicted for committing culpable homicide not amounting to murder. The concern addressed by the courts in those cases were more in the direction of treatment, rehabilitation and prevention rather than deterrence or retribution.

(2) The accused was apparently oblivious to the fact that the person whom he attacked – that too over a trivial pearl bracelet – was none other than his mother, as he was then in the throes of an epileptic seizure. The accused was indeed in need of a long and closely monitored treatment regimen, and if not afforded that, the likelihood of danger and harm to the public was not imaginary but real.

(3) Consequently, having regard to all the factors, the accused is sentenced to a term of imprisonment for life with a direction that the accused be given treatment on a regular basis for his illness whilst serving his sentence.

Case(s) referred to

Neo Man Lee v Public Prosecutor [1991] 2 MLJ 369 (refd)

Public Prosecutor v Aloysius Joshi Carilman

(CC 43/1999) (refd)

Public Prosecutor v Dolah bin Omar

(2001) 4 SLR 302 (refd)

Public Prosecutor v Donald Peter Chandraraj

(CC 9/1996) (refd)

Public Prosecutor v Kwok Teng Soon

(2001) 4 SLR 576 (refd)

Public Prosecutor v Lee Chee Seng

(CC 48/1996) (refd)

Public Prosecutor v Lim Boon Chong Cyril

(CC 34/1997) (refd)

Public Prosecutor v Ong Wee Teck

(2001) 3 SLR 479 (refd)

Public Prosecutor v Wee Eng Jong

(CC 21/2001) (refd)

R v Rowland Jack Foster Hodgson

(1968) 52 Cr App R 113 (refd)

Legislation referred to

Penal Code (Cap 224) s 304(a)

Judgment

GROUNDS OF DECISION

1. Lim Hock Hin, a 42-year old male Singaporean pleaded guilty before me and was convicted for an offence of committing culpable homicide not amounting to murder under s 304 (a) of the Penal Code (Cap 224). The charge he faced averred that he slashed his 65-year old mother with a knife at about 11.30 am, on 13 November 2001 with the intention of causing bodily hurt as was likely to cause death and caused her to suffer death on 20 November 2001.

2. The facts which gave rise to the present proceedings can be summarised as follows.

3. The accused and his mother Mdm Tan Ah Pong were residing at a flat at Block 12 Redhill Close, #01-106, Singapore. At about 11.30 am, on 13 November 2001, the accused had an argument with his mother in their flat over the whereabouts of a pearl bracelet given to him by someone. In the course of the altercation, he started pushing his mother in the chest continuously. When his mother was trying to placate him by saying that she could not recall where she had placed the bracelet, the accused started to become violent. He first used a chair and later other objects which he could get hold of from the kitchen to hit and hurt her. When his mother continued to protest that she could not recall where the bracelet was, the accused suddenly seized a knife found nearby and slashed her, causing her to fall.

4. It would appear that after Mdm Tan was hurt, she somehow managed to find her way to her neighbour’s flat and informed her neighbour that her son had stabbed her with a knife. The neighbour then called the police.

5. The accused, in the meantime, fled the flat in panic. However, as he reached the top floor of a nearby block of flats, he felt that his mother might still be alive. He then decided to return home and he did.

6. Upon his return, the accused noticed the presence of police officers as well as his siblings outside the flat. Presently, he asked the police the condition of his mother and was told that she was all right. He was soon arrested and sent to hospital for treatment as he was found to have injured his right hand.

7. The post-mortem finding of Dr Wee Kheng Poh, Consultant Forensic Pathologist from the Centre for Forensic Medicine, Health Sciences Authority, was that the cause of the death of the victim was bronchopneumonia with hypoxic encephalopathy following a slash wound of the neck. The post-mortem report also listed a number of injuries to the victim’s head, neck, chest, abdomen and arms.

8. The accused was, in the event, sent to Woodbridge Hospital for a psychiatric assessment. In the opinion of Dr Stephen Phang, Consultant Psychiatrist from Woodbridge Hospital and the Institute of Mental Health, the accused was suffering from an acute epileptic seizure at the time of the offence which significantly impaired his better judgment and impulse control, to the extent that he attacked his mother fatally as a direct consequence of his malady, which he would not have done had he not had a fit that morning. Dr Phang added that ‘however impaired though his judgement may have been at and around the material time, he still retained sufficient mental capacity to be capable of forming an intent to cause the injuries in question’.

9. Further,...