Teo Lay Choon v Public Prosecutor

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judge: See Kee Oon
• Judgment Date: 28 June 2001
• Neutral Citation: [2001] SGDC 197
• Published date: 19 September 2003
• Year: 2001
• Citation: [2001] SGDC 197
• Court: District Court (Singapore)

Judgment:

GROUNDS OF DECISION

The charges

1.

The accused is one Teo Lay Choon At all material times, he was a director and substantial shareholder of Alniff Industries Pte Ltd (AIPL), RCB No: 198302821N, whose registered office is located at No. 237 Ubi Avenue 4, Interpid Warehouse Complex. He claimed trial to the following two charges

1. DAC 3698/01

   You, Teo Lay Choon, M/36 yrs, DOB: 17.2.64 NRIC: S1673342C are charged that you, from a day in January 2000 to 14^th day of January 2000, in Singapore, did employ one Chanmiah @ Syed Kaochhar Uddin (Badal) Syed Moinuddin, M/25 yrs, Bangladesh National, as a general worker, whom you had reasonable grounds for believing to be a person who has acted in contravention of Section 6(1)(c) of the Immigration Act Chapter 133, by entering Singapore without being in possession of a Valid Pass issued by Controller of Immigration, Singapore, and you have thereby committed an offence under Section 57(1)(e) of the Immigration Act, Chapter 133 and punishable under Section 57(1)(ii) of the said Act.

2. DAC 3699/01

You, Teo Lay Choon, M/36 yrs, DOB: 17.2.64 NRIC: S1673342C are charged that you, from a day in January 2000 to 14 January 2000, at 237 Ubi Avenue 4, Intrepid Warehouse Complex, Singapore, did harbour one Chanmiah @ Syed Kaochhar Uddin (Badal) Syed Moinuddin, M/25 yrs, Bangladesh National, as a general worker, whom you had reasonable grounds for believing to be a person who has acted in contravention of Section 6(1)(c) of the Immigration Act Chapter 133, by entering Singapore without being in possession of a Visit Pass and you have thereby committed an offence under Section 57(1)(d) of the Immigration Act, Chapter 133 and punishable under Section 57(1)(ii) of the said Act.

2. A third charge in PS 559/01 was brought against AIPL for employing Chanmiah @ Syed Kaochhar Uddin (Badal) Syed Moinuddin (Chanmiah) as a general worker, in contravention of s 57(1)(e) of the Immigration Act (the Act) and punishable under s 57(2A) of the Act. The charge is identical to that brought against the accused in DAC 3698/01 (the employment charge). The accused was the authorised representative for AIPL in these proceedings. Unless otherwise indicated in this grounds of decision, all references and observations made pertaining to the employment charge will apply equally to the accused and AIPL.

3. It was common ground that a joint trial of all three charges would be expedient and appropriate. At the conclusion of the trial, I found both the accused and AIPL guilty and convicted them accordingly. My reasons are set out below.

Undisputed background facts

4. A number of facts were undisputed or unchallenged. It was not disputed that AIPL had engaged and used the services of Chanmiah. The duration and precise scope of employment was disputed. In respect of both the employment and harbouring charges, the accused claimed that he should not be held personally responsible. Another pivotal aspect of the defence was that the accused lacked mens rea, in the sense that he did not have reasonable grounds for believing that Chanmiah was an immigration offender.

5. At all material times, the accused was managing AIPLs business as its de facto managing director. His wife, Mdm Katherine Tan Mei San (DW 2 - Mdm Tan) was also a director. There is a third director (Teo Lay Sin) who appears to have played no part in the business. Mdm Tan assisted the accused with AIPLs day-to-day administrative affairs as its administrative manager. They were the two persons solely responsible for running AIPLs business. According to AIPLs business profile extracts from the Registry of Companies and Businesses (RCB see exhibit P8), the company had an issued and paid-up capital of $150,000. The accused held 149,999 shares. The only other shareholder was Teo Lay Sin, with one share. AIPLs operating premises was located at its registered office address at 237 Ubi Avenue 4.

6. AIPL provided lift maintenance and installation services. Chanmiah was first sent to work with AIPL prior to 14 January 2000 by an unidentified male Bangladeshi who was purportedly acting on the instructions of one Mr Amo (Amo). Upon arrival at AIPLs premises, he was introduced to Mdm Tan. A copy of Amos business card was produced by the defence (see exhibit D1). The card indicates that Amo is the MD of AM. R. Supply Services (AMR), located at 5001 Beach Road #03-02 Golden Mile Complex, Singapore 199588. Telephone, facsimile and pager numbers are also stated on the card, together with a handwritten reference to a person named Jahiru.

7. AIPL entered into a written labour supply agreement with AM. R. Supply Services dated 16 December 1999 (exhibit D2). Amo had styled himself as the boss of AMR, a sole proprietorship with its registered place of business at 5001 Beach Road #03-02 Golden Mile Complex, Singapore 199588. Curiously, however, there is no record of any individual known as Amo or Jahiru in the RCB search (exhibit D3). The sole registered owner and manager are one and the same person, namely one Syed Mohamed Hanif bin S A Zabar, of 74 Dawson Road #01-42, Singapore 149501. AMRs principal activity is listed in D3 not as labour supply but building-cleaning activities nec (eg. janitorial service). Unfortunately, both Amo and Syed Mohamed Hanif bin S A Zabar have not been located and their whereabouts remain unknown. According to the investigating officer, Syed Mohamed Hanif bin S A Zabar is in fact gazetted by another police division as a wanted criminal.

8. On 14 January 2000, Chanmiah was arrested at the premises of Singapore Press Holdings (SPH) at No 2 Jurong Port Road (the SPH premises). He had been sent to work there together with some of AIPLs other employees, in a vehicle driven by Lim Thiam Chye (DW4), who was one of AIPLs workers. Ahmad bin Abd Radzi (Ahmad PW1), the security officer at the SPH guard house, had requested to inspect Chanmiahs work permit before permitting him to gain access to the SPH premises. Ahmad was suspicious since Chanmiahs work permit (see exhibit P4) was not an original permit but a laminated photocopied permit in the name of Syed Kaochhar Uddin (Badal) Syed Moinnudin. He also felt that Chanmiah did not resemble the person depicted in the photograph on the work permit. As such, Ahmad barred Chanmiah from entering the SPH premises and proceeded to call the police for assistance.

9. When the police arrived at the SPH premises, Sgt Low Kay Wee (PW3 Sgt Low) checked Chanmiahs work permit and then proceeded to arrest him on suspicion of being an illegal immigrant. It was established later that Chanmiah was indeed an immigration offender. He had entered Singapore illegally from Malaysia by hiding in a lorry. He had since pleaded guilty to a charge of entering Singapore illegally and had served his sentence of one months imprisonment, with four strokes of the cane.

10. As for the photocopied work permit produced by Chanmiah (P4), it was established that a work permit had indeed been issued to a male Bangladeshi named Syed Kaochhar Uddin (Badal) Syed Moinnudin (Syed Kaochhar) enabling the holder to work from 30 March 99 to 10 February 2001 as a construction worker for Glovic International Pte Ltd. However, as confirmed by Ms Ng Mun Yi (PW4 Ms Ng), an officer with the Ministry of Manpowers Work Permit Department, the permit was cancelled on 30 October 1999.

11. Furthermore, from screening performed by Ms Raudzah bte Jaafar (Ms Raudzah) of the Data Processing Centre, Singapore Immigration and Registration on Syed Kaochhars entry and exit status, he was issued with a short term pass dated 11 November 1999, valid until 18 November 1999. A departure record revealed that Syed Kaochhar had left Singapore onboard a flight departing from Terminal 2 on 11 November 1999 (see conditioned statement of Ms Raudzah marked PS1). His present whereabouts are unknown. Syed Kaochhars original work permit (P7) and passport (P9) were produced to the investigating officer by the accused, who claimed that he had only managed to obtain them after Chanmiahs arrest.

Chanmiahs evidence

12. To a large extent, the prosecutions case was not challenged by the defence. In determining that a prima facie case had been established to warrant the defence being called on all three counts, I relied primarily on the evidence of Chanmiah. After entering Singapore sometime in early January 2000, he had gone to Serangoon. He stayed at a lodging house there for a few days. A male Bangladeshi later told him that he could help him find a job. This male Bangladeshi, known to Chanmiah only as Jhanjir, brought him to AIPLs premises one morning. There, the accused gave Chanmiah the photocopied work permit P4. The accused then told him that his name was as stated in P4 (ie. Syed Kaochhar Uddin (Badal) Syed Moinuddin). He also told Chanmiah that he could start work immediately and he could stay at AIPLs office premises.

13. The accused told Chanmiah to follow another Chinese man who would give him instructions on the work he had to do. He did not talk to Chanmiah about his salary. However, Jhanjir had told Chanmiah that his salary would be $16 per day. Chanmiah testified that he began working at AIPLs premises upon his arrival. He stayed there for about seven days. Apart from working at AIPLs premises, he was sent to work at other locations as well. He was not able to identify those locations. He was not able to recall having seen Mdm Tan at AIPLs premises, and was unable to recognise her in court.

14. Chanmiah explained that he had been asked to perform general tasks, such as loading and unloading of items, packing and storage or painting. He described the room in which he stayed and how it was furnished. It was located at a mezzanine level at AIPLs premises and was accessible only by a staircase from the rear. He said that there was a married couple staying in the room together with him. He could not tell what race...