Tay Poh Lim v Public Prosecutor

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judge: Khoo Oon Soo
• Judgment Date: 16 January 2001
• Neutral Citation: [2001] SGDC 13
• Year: 2001
• Published date: 19 September 2003
• Citation: [2001] SGDC 13
• Court: District Court (Singapore)

JUDGMENT:

Grounds of Decision

1 The accused pleaded guilty before me to the following 6 charges:

DAC 28460/2000

You,

TAY POH LIM, Male 42 years

NRIC No: S1252605I

are charged that you on the 11^th day of July 2000, at or about 9.45 am, at the car park of Blk 678 Hougang Ave 8 at lot number 30, Singapore, did commit theft of the following items:-

1. one "Nokia" ear piece valued at about $15/-;
2. one cash card with stored valued of $13.45 cents;
3. one key with remote controller and
4. one compartment box containing cash of about $3/- (all $1/- coins)

from motor van bearing registration number GN 5639 T, worth a total value of about $31,45 cents, by taking it out of the possession of one Kwek Kim Choon, and you have thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 379 of the Penal Code, Chapter 224.

(vide Exhibit P1)

DAC 33453/2000

You,

TAY POH LIM, Male 42 years

NRIC No: S1252605I

are charged that you on or about the 9^th day of July, 2000 at or about 10.30 pm at car park of Blk 93 Geylang Bahru, lot no. 100, Singapore, committed theft of a Datsun motor pick-up bearing registration number GK 9223Z, valued at $500/- in the possession of one Tan Eng Seng, and you have thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 379A of the Penal Code, Chapter 224.

(vide Exhibit P2)

DAC 33454/2000

You,

TAY POH LIM, Male 42 years

NRIC No: S1252605I

are charged that you on or about the 11^th day of July, 2000 at or about 12.45 pm at Blk 677 Hougang Ave 8 void deck, Singapore, did have in your possession one "Samsung 600" handphone with ear piece and casing valued at about $250/-, for which you failed to account satisfactorily as to how you came by the same, and you have thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 35(1) of the Miscellaneous Offences (Public Order and Nuisance) Act, Chapter 184.

(vide Exhibit P3A)

DAC 24088/2000

You,

TAY POH LIM, Male 42 years

NRIC No: S1252605I

are charged that you, on the 20^th day of June 2000, at or about 7.15 pm, at the multi-storey car park along Market Street, Singapore, did commit theft of the following:-

1. One tyre pressure meter
2. One pair of "Eagles" binoculars
3. One black sling bag
4. One grey jacket
5. One pair of white jogging shoe
6. One pair of "Cyber" sunglasses
7. One "United Colours of Bentton" Camera
8. Some clothing
9. One cash card with value amounting to S$9.66
10. Some parking coupons valued at S$4.05

from vehicle SCZ 8675 C, belonging to one Ng Lai Hong Eleanor, and you have thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 379 of the Penal Code, Chapter 224.

(vide Exhibit P5A)

DAC 26120/2000

You,

TAY POH LIM, Male 42 years old

NRIC No: S1252605I

are charged that you, on the 20^th day of June 2000, at or about 7.30 pm, at the multi-storey car park along Market Street, Singapore, did attempt to commit theft from vehicle SCG 6965 D belonging to one Tay Tian Guan, and you have thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 379 read with Section 511 of the Penal Code, Chapter 224.

(vide Exhibit P6)

MAC 6795/2000

You,

TAY POH LIM, Male 42 years

NRIC No: S1252605I

are charged that you, before the 10^th day of July 2000, at about 12.30 pm, at the multi-storey car park of Blk 58 Geylang Bahru, Singapore, did commit mischief, to wit, by spraying paint on the doors of motor pick-up bearing registration number GK 9223Z, belonging to one Tan Eng Seng, and you have thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 426 of the Penal Code, Chapter 224.

(vide Exhibit P8)

2 Two other charges were taken into consideration fraudulent possession of property and loitering with intent to commit an offence.

3 He was sentenced to 7 years Preventive Detention and disqualified from all classes for 3 years from date of release in respect of charge P2. He is dissatisfied with the sentence and has lodged the present appeal.

4 In assessing sentence I considered the following factors:

1. sentencing framework;
2. circumstances of the case;
3. previous convictions;
4. mitigation.

5 In respect of the sentencing framework, it is noted that the following were the sentences prescribed for each of the offences proceeded with:

1. Charge in P1 Sec 379 of the Penal Code

Imprisonment up to 3 years or fine or both;

2. Charge in P2 Sec 379A of the Penal Code

Imprisonment of not less than 1 year and not more than 7 years and shall be liable to fine in addition to mandatory disqualification of 3 years from all classes from the date of release;

3. Charge in P3A Sec 35(1) of Miscellaneous Offences (Public Order & Nuisance) Act

Liable to fine not exceeding to $3,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 1 year or both;

4. Charge in P5A Sec 379

As in (a) above

5. Charge in P6 Sec 379 rw Sec 511

As for (a) above but any imprisonment imposed should not be more than one half of the 3 years for theft;

6. Charge in P8 Sec 426

Punishment up to 3 months or with fine or both.

6 It would be noticed that these offences committed by the accused related to offences against property. This would be relevant to the sentence to be imposed on the accused when his previous convictions are considered.

7 In respect of the circumstances of the case, the details are given in the Statement of facts (vide Exhibit C). The material facts are these.

For the charge in P1 (DAC 28460/2000) investigations revealed that on or about 11 July 2000 at about 9.40 am, the owner of motor van GN 5639 T had parked his vehicle at Lot No. 30 behind Block 678 Hougang Ave 8. He then left to do his delivery without locking his vehicle. At or about 9.45 am, the accused was seen opening the passenger door of this van and bending inwards. A while later the accused stood up, closed the van door and walked away with something in his hand. The van owner was informed of this by an alert witness. He quickly checked his vehicle and found the items mentioned in the charge missing. These items had a total value of $31.45. He then reported the matter to the police. As it turned out the witness spotted the accused walking towards Block 677 in the same vicinity. The witness positively identified the accused to the van owner. The accused was detained and handed over to the police subsequently. Certain items were found in the accuseds possession two of which were identified by the van owner to be his. Some of the other items would form the subject matter of other charges.

In respect of charge P2 (DAC 33453/2000) the facts showed that on or about 9 July, 2 days earlier, about 10.30 pm the accused was at Block 93 Geylang Bahru carpark when he spotted the motor pickup GK 9223 Z. He proceeded to break into the said motor pickup as he saw a cash card and a set of 3 keys in the ignition. To facilitate the break in he used a brick to smash the quarter glass of the motor pickup. Thereafter, he opened the door and drove the motor pickup away.

When he was arrested on the 11^th for the offence in charge P1 he was also found in possession of a bunch of 3 keys which this pickup owner identified to be his. The pickup was found on the same day of his arrest at car park of Block 678 Hougang Ave 8. The value of the pickup was about $500.

In respect of charge P3A (DAC 33454/2000) the facts further showed that when he was arrested on 11 July, he was found in possession of one "Samsung 600" handphone with ear piece and casing valued at $250. The handphone owner was a lady who worked at the Hougang Community Development Council located at No. 35 Hougange Ave 3. On 11 July at about 8.30 am she had left the handphone on the table when she went to the kitchen to make coffee. When she returned 5 minutes later she found her...