Public Prosecutor v Mohammad Shahrir Bin Abdul Rashid

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judge: Carol Ling Feng Yong
• Judgment Date: 27 August 2021
• Neutral Citation: [2021] SGDC 166
• Court: District Court (Singapore)
• Hearing Date: 14 July 2021
• Docket Number: DAC 926573/2018 & Ors, Magistrate’s Appeal 9164/2021/01
• Plaintiff Counsel: Esther Wong (Attorney-General's Chambers)
• Defendant Counsel: Accused in person
• Subject Matter: Criminal Procedure and Sentencing,Offences under Misuse of Drugs Act,Offences under Penal Code,Traffic-related Offences,Aggregate sentence
• Published date: 05 September 2021

District Judge Carol Ling Feng Yong: Charges and Sentences Imposed

The Accused, 27 years of age, pleaded guilty to 10 charges and agreed to take into consideration 10 other charges for purposes of sentencing. The proceeded charges and sentences imposed are set out below:

	Case Number	Offence	Sentence
1	DAC 926573/2018	Consumption of Methamphetamine Section 8(b)(ii) Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, Rev Ed 2008) p/u Section 33(4) Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, Rev Ed 2008)	Three years’ imprisonment (consecutive)
2	DAC 910039/2021	Possession of not less than 3.22 grams of methamphetamine Section 8(a) Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, Rev Ed 2008) p/u Section 33(1) Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, Rev Ed 2008)	10 months’ imprisonment (consecutive)
3	DAC 910040/2021	Possession of drug utensils Section 9 Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, Rev Ed 2008) p/u Section 33(1) Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, Rev Ed 2008)	Three months' imprisonment
4	MAC 904595/2021	Theft of $800 by withdrawal of cash from an Automated Teller Machine (ATM) using victim’s ATM card Section 379 Penal Code (Cap 224, Rev Ed 2008)	Fine of $2,000 in default two weeks’ imprisonment
5	MAC 904798/2021	Causing hurt by rash act which endangered the personal safety of others, by accelerating a vehicle when the victim’s body was partially in the vehicle Section 337(a) Penal Code (Cap 224, Rev Ed 2008)	Eight months' imprisonment Disqualification of three years with effect from date of release (consecutive)
6	DAC 915383/2018	Dangerous driving by speeding, beating a red light and travelling against the flow of traffic Section 64(1) Road Traffic Act (Cap 276, Rev Ed 2004)	Six weeks’ Imprisonment Disqualification of two years with effect from date of release (consecutive)
7	DAC 915384/2018	Failure to stop when required by a police officer in uniform Section 127(5) Road Traffic Act (Cap 276, Rev Ed 2004) p/u Section 131(2)(a) Road Traffic Act (Cap 276, Rev Ed 2004)	Fine of $600, in default three days’ imprisonment
8	DAC 906429/2021	Driving a vehicle without a valid driving licence Section 35(1) Road Traffic Act (Cap 276, Rev Ed 2004) p/u Section 131(2)(a) Road Traffic Act (Cap 276, Rev Ed 2004)	Fine of $1,000, in default five days’ imprisonment
9	DAC 906430/2021	Using a vehicle without insurance Section 3(1)(a) Motor Vehicles (Third-Party Risks and Compensation) Act (Cap 189, Rev Ed 2000) p/u Section 3(2) Motor Vehicles (Third-Party Risks and Compensation) Act (Cap 189, Rev Ed 2000) p/u Section 3(3) Motor Vehicles (Third-Party Risks and Compensation) Act (Cap 189, Rev Ed 2000)	Fine of $1,000, in default five days’ imprisonment Disqualification of 12 months with effect from date of conviction
10	DAC 906431/2021	Speeding at 86 kmph in excess of the imposed speed limit of 70 kmph of the vehicle Section 63(4) Road Traffic Act (Cap 276, Rev Ed 2004) r/w Section 63(1) Road Traffic Act (Cap 276, Rev Ed 2004) p/u Section 131(2)(a) Road Traffic Act (Cap 276, Rev Ed 2004)	Fine of $1000 in default five days’ imprisonment

I ordered the imprisonment terms in four charges, namely the first, second, fifth and sixth charges (as they appear in the table above) to run consecutively.

The total sentence was: Three years and 18 months and six weeks’ imprisonment and a fine of $5,600 (in default two weeks and 18 days’ imprisonment). The Accused was also disqualified from holding or obtaining all classes of driving licences for a period of three years with effect from his date of release from prison. The imprisonment term was backdated to 28 January 2021, the date when Accused was arrested pursuant to a warrant of arrest.

This is the Accused’s appeal against sentence.

Reasons for the Sentences Consumption of methamphetamine (DAC 926573/2018) Facts relating to the consumption of methamphetamine

On 25 July 2018, the Accused was arrested by Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB) officers on suspicion for consumption of a specified drug. Both his urine samples were subsequently sent to the Health Sciences Authority (“HSA”) and were found to contain methamphetamine. The Accused admitting to abusing “sejuk” – a street name for methamphetamine¹.

The Accused was previously convicted of an offence of consumption of methamphetamine on 14 November 2011. He was sentenced to Reformative Training Centre (RTC). Due to his previous conviction, the Accused was liable for enhanced punishment on this charge.

Sentence for consumption of methamphetamine

The Accused was first charged in court on 3 May 2018 on traffic- related charges. This offence of consumption of methamphetamine was committed whilst he was on bail. In addition, Accused admitted and consented to have one other charge of consumption of methamphetamine (DAC 921243/2018) taken into consideration for purposes of sentencing. Notwithstanding these factors which may have justified a slight uplift from the minimum sentence, I was of the view that the minimum sentence of three years’ imprisonment would be sufficient on this charge and I imposed the same.

Possession of not less than 3.22 grams of methamphetamine (DAC 910039/2021) and drug utensils ((DAC 910040/2021) Facts relating to the possession of methamphetamine and drug utensils

On 21 December 2020, police officers were despatched to A Star’s company premises at Blk 7030 Ang Mo Kio Ave 5, #01-47, Northstar @ AMK, in response to a report concerning an abandoned van and items which had been left in it. Police officers searched the van and recovered the following exhibits: 1 packet containing a crystallized substance (marked as “NO-A1”); 1 small sachet containing a crystallised substance (marked as “NO-A4”); and 1 improvised utensil (marked as “NO-B”).

On 20 January 2021, HSA certified that exhibit “NO-A1” contained not less than 4.77 grams of crystalline substance which was analysed and found to contain 3.22 grams of methamphetamine. As for exhibit “NO-A4”, it was found to be 1 packet containing not less than 0.06 gram of crystalline substance which was analysed and found to contain methamphetamine.

Investigations revealed that the Accused had obtained the use of this van from his friend, one Muhammad Taufiq Bin Ishak, who had in turn rented the van from a van rental company, A Star Leasing Pte Ltd (“A Star”). The van was subsequently returned to A Star. The Accused admitted to the ownership of the drug exhibits and also admitted that the methamphetamine contained in them was for his own consumption².

Sentence for possession of methamphetamine

The sentence for possession of class A controlled drugs since Dinesh Singh Bhatia v Public Prosecutor [2005] 3 SLR 1 has been accepted to be in the range of six months to 18 months imprisonment³.

The sentence of 10 months’ imprisonment imposed on this charge was not excessive, bearing in mind that 3.22 grams of methamphetamine may not be described as negligible. The Accused was also a mature offender and had one other charge of possession of methamphetamine taken into consideration.

Sentence for possession of drug utensils

On this charge, I imposed a sentence of three months’ imprisonment which was well-within the range of sentences imposed for offences of this nature⁴. Notwithstanding the fact that the Accused had another charge of possession of drug utensils taken into consideration at the time of sentencing, I did not see the need to increase the sentence on this particular charge.

Theft under section 379 Penal Code (MAC 904595/2021) Facts relating to the theft

The victims in this theft charge are the Accused’s two siblings: his brother, Mohammad Azhar Bin Abdul Rashid (“Azhar”), who was 24 years old and in prison at the material time; and his sister, Zahara Binte Abdul Rashid (“Zahara”), who was 17 years old at the time.

The POSB bank account concerned XXX (“the account”) is registered in Azhar’s name. Both Azhar and Zahara had an informal arrangement for the monies deposited in the Account and for the use of the account to be shared between them. Zahara deposited her savings in the account on occasion, with Azhar’s consent. They each held an Automated Teller Machine (“ATM”) card for the account.

On 27 August 2018, Zahara discovered that the Accused had made two cash withdrawals of $200 each from the account. She requested the Accused to return the money that he had withdrawn from the account. The Accused subsequently went to Zahara’s unit in Yishun to confront her. When no one in the unit opened the door for him, he threw a scooter, which belonged to one of his children against the common corridor window. In the course of the argument which ensued with Zahara, the Accused burnt one $50 Singapore currency note and cut up two $50 notes.

After the argument, Zahara checked the account and discovered that the Accused had withdrawn a further $800 from the account. The Accused admitted to withdrawing $800 from the Account using Azhar’s ATM card without Zahara or Azhar’s consent.

Sentence for the theft

Prosecution sought a fine of $2,000 on this charge. I noted that the amount involved in this charge was not large – a sum of $800. Even considering that the Accused had two other theft charges under section 379 (both of small amounts of $200) taken into consideration, I was satisfied that a fine would suffice in the circumstances. I thus imposed a fine of $2,000 (in default two weeks’ imprisonment).

Causing hurt by rash act under section 337(a) Penal Code (MAC 904798/2021)

The charge read:

“You…are charged that you, on the 10th day of September 2018, at or about 9.05 pm, in the vicinity of Blk 569 Champions Way, Singapore 730569, did cause hurt to one Hou De Kai (“Hou”) by doing an act so rashly as to endanger...