Public Prosecutor v Rohaizad bin Suadi

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judge: Wong Choon Ning
• Judgment Date: 30 June 2005
• Neutral Citation: [2005] SGDC 145
• Plaintiff Counsel: Kwek Lou Winn (Deputy Public Prosecutor)
• Published date: 08 August 2005
• Court: District Court (Singapore)
• Defendant Counsel: R Kalamohan (Kalamohan and Co)
• Subject Matter: Criminal Law,Offences,Public tranquillity,Rioting,Accused running away upon seeing group of persons approaching him and the victim,Whether accused a member of an unlawful assembly,Whether person's mere presence in an assembly of persons makes him a member of an unlawful assembly,Section 147 Penal Code (Cap 224, 1985 Rev Ed),Criminal force,Accused pushing elbow against victim's stomach,Sentence,Section 352 Penal Code (Cap 224, 1985 Rev Ed)

30 June 2005 Judgment reserved.

District Judge Wong Choon Ning:

1 The first accused (Rohaizad Bin Suadi) claimed trial to the following re-amended charge :-

DAC 25280/2004 (Exh. P1B)

“You,

ROHAIZAD BIN SUADI, M/29 YRS

NRIC : S7503447-D

SINGAPORE CITIZEN

are charged that you, on the 27^th day of May 2004, at or about 3.00 am, along Coleman Street, Singapore, together with Aziz Bin Said, Abdul Hadi Bin Jumri, Rizal Bin Hassan, and 3 unknown male persons, were members of an unlawful assembly, whose common object was to cause hurt to one Chaudhry Muhammad Jawad UR Rehman and in prosecution of the common object of such assembly, you or some members, did use violence and caused hurt to the said Chaudhry Muhammad Jawad UR Rehman, to wit, by fisting and kicking him, and you have thereby committed an offence of rioting punishable under Section 147 of the Penal Code, Chapter 224.”

2 The first accused was jointly tried with the second accused (Rizal bin Hassan) who faced a similar charge for rioting (Exh. P2B).

3 At the conclusion of the trial, I found that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the first accused beyond a reasonable doubt and accordingly I acquitted the first accused on the rioting charge. I was, however, satisfied that a charge for using criminal force under Section 352 of the Penal Code had been made out against the first accused beyond a reasonable doubt. The first accused was accordingly convicted on the following charge drawn under the Court’s hand :-

DAC 25280/2004 (Exh. B)

“You,

ROHAIZAD BIN SUADI, M/29 YRS

NRIC : S7503447-D

SINGAPORE CITIZEN

are charged that you, on the 27^th day of May 2004, at or about 3.00 am, along the corridor on the ground floor of Peninsula Plaza, Coleman Street, did use criminal force to one Chaudhry Muhammad Jawad UR Rehman, otherwise than on grave and sudden provocation given by the said Chaudhry Muhammad Jawad UR Rehman, to wit, by pushing your elbow against his stomach, and you have thereby committed an offence under Section 352 of the Penal Code, Chapter 224.”

4 As for the second accused, I found that the prosecution had proven its case against him beyond a reasonable doubt and he was accordingly convicted on the rioting charge.

5 For the offence of using criminal force under Section 352 of the Penal Code, the first accused was fined $500 or in default one week’s imprisonment. The fine was paid in full.

6 The prosecution is dissatisfied with the order of acquittal on the charge under Section 147 of the Penal Code, and the orders of conviction and sentence on the charge under Section 352 and now appeals against them. There is no appeal against the orders of conviction and sentence for the second accused by both the prosecution and the defence.

Prosecution’s case

7 A total of nine witnesses were called to give oral evidence by the prosecution. An account of how the assault had occurred was given by the victim and a security guard who had witnessed the entire incident. The prosecution also called five witnesses who had been at the scene at the material time. Two of them, in particular, had participated in the assault on the victim and they gave testimony on the assault and the first accused’s role in the whole incident. The remaining two witnesses, namely, the Investigation Officer and a chief security officer, were essentially formal witnesses, through whom the first and second accused persons’ cautioned statements and a tape recording of part of the incident were admitted in evidence.

Evidence of the Victim and the Security Guard

8 On 27 May 2004, at around 3 am, one Chaudhry Muhammad Jawad (PW 2) (hereinafter referred to as “the victim”) was walking along the corridor on the ground floor of Peninsula Plaza. He had just spent about an hour with his friends at a pub in Boat Quay and was then on his way home.

9 After crossing Coleman Street, from Funan Centre, the victim was outside the SK Store in Peninsula Plaza, near to the 7-Eleven Store, when the first accused bumped into him. At that time, the first accused was alone.[1] The first accused looked angry and pushed his elbow on the victim’s stomach[2]. Standing very closely to him[3], the first accused held the victim by the shirt and asked him in English, “Are you drunk?”.[4] Apart from this, the first accused did not do anything else. He did not hit or beat the victim.[5]

10 This episode between the first accused and the victim was witnessed by a security guard, Borhanudin bin Buang (PW 2) (hereinafter referred to as “Borhanudin”), who was then resting near a palm tree (at the spot marked as “X” in photo P42), about 8 to 10 steps away from them.[6] His attention having been drawn to the commotion, Borhanudin started to walk towards the victim and the first accused (who were around the spot marked as “Y1” in photo P43).

11 Borhanudin then noticed another man approach the victim and straightaway punch the latter. This second man had come from somewhere outside the corridor (which is shown as the background of the lower right frame of photo P28).[7] This second man had not come from the group of men who had been with Borhanudin earlier near the palm tree.[8] Borhanudin’s evidence was that, at this stage, there was no other man involved with the victim, the first accused and the second man.[9]

12 The victim then saw some other people who were in the vicinity move towards him.[10] Fearing for his own safety, he turned and ran away in the direction towards Funan Centre. As he ran, the victim did not look back to see who were chasing him. Along Coleman Street, he was pushed or punched or slapped by someone from behind[11], causing him to fall face downwards in the middle of the road. The victim could not say who had hit him from behind.

13 In the meantime, Borhanudin had also followed the victim.[12] But there was an interval when he lost sight of the victim, as the victim was running and Borhanudin was only walking after him.[13] He hence did not see the victim fall down[14] and could not say how he had fallen down[15]. He also did not see who had hit the victim from behind.

14 By the time Borhanudin reached Coleman Street, the victim was already lying on the road.[16] A group of men surrounded the victim, kicking and punching him.[17] The assault occurred around the spot marked as “Y2” in photo P46. After falling face downwards, the victim had turned and laid on his back, and he covered his face to protect himself. The victim who had his face covered estimated his group of assailants to be around eight men. Borhanudin, on the other hand, initially described the group as numbering more than ten men but, under cross-examination, reduced the figure to five or six men[18].

15 During the group assault, Borhanudin did not approach the group but kept observations from a spot on the open-air pavement of Peninsula Plaza (in front of a pillar shown on the right side of photo P46). At that time, the distance between the victim and Borhanudin was about the width of two car-lanes or, in Borhanudin’s own words, the equivalent of 5 steps. Borhanudin’s attention was focused on the victim and he did not take his eyes away from the victim until the assault stopped.[19]

16 The victim could not identify those who had assaulted him or chased him. Borhanudin was also unable to identify those who had assaulted the victim. As the place where the victim was assaulted was quite dim[20], Borhanudin also could not tell if the first accused had also fallen down on the road.[21]

17 The assault was over very quickly.[22] It lasted only a few seconds[23] before one of the men took the victim’s wallet and the group then moved towards the direction of Stamford Road.[24] It is not known why the men suddenly stopped beating the victim.[25]

18 The victim did not seek medical attention for his injuries which consisted of a cut on the right cheek, a swelling on the forehead, bruises on the left forearm and a scratch near the knuckles on the right hand.[26]

Evidence of two men who had participated in the group assault on the victim

19 Abdul Hadi bin Jumri (PW 7), who is also known as Topeng Ali or Topeng Hadi (hereinafter referred to as “Abdul Hadi”), was the man who had approached and punched the victim along the corridor of Peninsula Plaza. Abdul Hadi testified that he and the first accused, together with a few other friends, had gone to Peninsula Plaza after a night out at the Chocolate Bar in Boat Quay. Along the corridor, Abdul Hadi was waiting with a friend named Eddie for their friends who had gone into the 7-Eleven Store at Peninsula Plaza[27], when he saw the first accused confront the victim and argue with him.[28] Subsequently, he saw the first accused push the victim. Wanting to help the first accused[29], Abdul Hadi went to the victim and straightaway punched him.

20 The victim then ran towards Coleman Street. The first accused ran after him. There was a third man whom Abdul Hadi recognized to be one named “Papa” who also chased the victim. Abdul Hadi also joined in the chase.

21 When he reached Coleman Street, Abdul Hadi saw that the victim had already fallen onto the road. In re-examination, Abdul Hadi clarified that he actually did not know why the victim had fallen down. While he was running after the victim, he did not take note of what the first accused was doing.[30] Abdul Hadi was also unable to say who, between the first accused or “Papa”, was the one running ahead of the other.[31]

22 Abdul Hadi testified that he did not ever see the first accused punch the victim during the chase.[32] He merely assumed that the first accused had punched the victim, causing the latter to fall, as he could recall someone mentioning something to this effect to him later that night, when he reunited with the first accused and their friends.[33] Abdul Hadi, however, could not recall who had said this to him.

23 Seeing the victim lying on the road, Abdul Hadi went and sat on the victim, between his waist and his stomach,...