Public Prosecutor v Muhammad Khairil bin Abdul Rahim
Judge | Wong Choon Ning |
Judgment Date | 30 December 2011 |
Neutral Citation | [2011] SGDC 436 |
Citation | [2011] SGDC 436 |
Docket Number | ERP 29026 of 2011 |
Published date | 02 February 2012 |
Hearing Date | 30 December 2011,28 July 2011 |
Plaintiff Counsel | Mr Edmund Woo |
Defendant Counsel | Accused in Person |
Court | Magistrates' Court (Singapore) |
The accused pleaded guilty before me to a charge under Section 3(1) of the Motor Vehicles (Third-Party Risks & Compensation) Act (Cap 189) for having used a motor-cycle when there was not in force in relation to the user of the said vehicle such a policy of insurance in respect of third-party risks as complies with the requirements of the said Act. He also pleaded guilty to another charge under Section 15 of the Road Traffic Act (Cap 276) for having used the said motor-cycle on the same date, time and place when there was not in force a motor vehicle licence.
After hearing the accused’s oral and written mitigation plea and in consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, I imposed a fine of $500 or in default 5 days’ imprisonment for each of the first and second charges. For the first charge, I further ordered the accused to be disqualified from driving all classes of vehicles for a period of one year.
The defence is dissatisfied with the orders of sentence and now appeals against them. The accused has paid up the fines.
FACTS OF THE CASE The Statement of Facts (
The accused was a first offender.
MITIGATION PLEA In his written mitigation plea (
The accused stated, in his mitigation plea, as he was preoccupied with his work, he relied on letters of reminder sent to him in order to remember when he ought to renew his road tax and insurance. The accused’s explanation for his omission to renew the road tax in Dec 2010 and the insurance in May 2011 was that this was due to him not having received the letters of reminder to renew the road tax and the insurance for the said vehicle. Upon realising, after the police check at the road block on 21 May 2011 (Sat), that the road tax and insurance had expired, he quickly renewed them on 23 May 2011 (Mon).
To show that his failure to renew the road tax and insurance was not a deliberate omission, the accused annexed a document to his written mitigation plea to indicate that he had renewed the insurance for another motor-cycle (bearing registration number DE 456 F) which he owned, in Mar 2011. The accused stated that he had also renewed the road tax for this second motor-cycle in Mar 2011. According to the accused, the road tax and insurance for the second motor-cycle was renewed because he had received the reminder letter to renew the road tax for it. The accused hence attributed the blame for his current offences (that is, his omission to renew the road tax and insurance for the motor-cycle bearing registration number AB 123 C) to the fact that he did not receive the reminder letter for this vehicle.
The accused also submitted that he had a slipped disc which would cause him to experience acute pain if there was prolonged standing and walking. The pain would, however, be greatly reduced if he could use his own motor vehicle. The accused also needed to travel to multiple locations for his work both during the day and at...
To continue reading
Request your trial