LITT
Try LITT free
Public Prosecutor v Kanesan S/O Ratnam [2002] SGHC 42
The accused was found guilty of murder after confessing to killing his cell-mate by strangulation, with no evidence of diminished responsibility.
Public Prosecutor v Thongthot Yordsa-Art and Another [2002] SGHC 34
The court held that members of an unlawful assembly are liable for murder under s 149 of the Penal Code if they knew that death was a likely consequence of the common object of causing grievous hurt.
Amir Hamzah Bin Berang Kuty v Public Prosecutor [2002] SGHC 307
The court held that for a charge of abetment by conspiracy under s 107(b) of the Penal Code, it is not necessary for the accused to be the mastermind of the conspiracy.
Public Prosecutor v Hendricks Glen Conleth [2002] SGHC 306
An appellate court will be slow to overturn findings of fact by the trial judge, especially when an assessment of the credibility and veracity of the witnesses has been made.
Public Prosecutor v Ang Johnny [2002] SGHC 305
The court found the accused guilty of aggravated rape and wrongful restraint with intent to outrage modesty, rejecting his defence that the sexual intercourse was consensual and occurred on a different occasion.
Louis Pius Gilbert v Public Prosecutor [2002] SGHC 303
The court dismissed an appeal against a sentence for assaulting a lawyer in court. It affirmed that unopposed medical evidence should be accepted and that attacking legal professionals during proceedings is a serious aggravating factor justifying enhanced penalties.
Ow Yew Beng v Public Prosecutor [2002] SGHC 301
The test for 'reason to believe' under s 411 of the Penal Code is objective, conducted from the vantage point of someone with the appellant's knowledge and experience.
Wong Loke Cheng v Public Prosecutor [2002] SGHC 299
An appellate court will not disturb findings of fact unless they are clearly reached against the weight of the evidence, especially where findings depend on witness credibility.
Public Prosecutor v Arun Prakash Vaithilingam [2002] SGHC 295
The court held that the accused was guilty of murder as he had intended to use the knife to attack the victim, and the defence of sudden fight under Exception 4 to s 300 of the Penal Code was not available as the accused had taken an unfair advantage by arming himself beforehand.
Mohamed Mustafa s/o Shahul Hamid v Public Prosecutor [2002] SGHC 251
The court held that findings of fact by a trial judge, based on the credibility of witnesses, should not be disturbed unless they are clearly against the weight of the evidence.
Public Prosecutor v Aw Teck Hock [2002] SGHC 249
Intoxication is not a mitigating factor for a grown-up man in a criminal charge, and the court must consider the disparity in physical condition between the accused and the elderly victim.
Yeo Chiang Chew v Public Prosecutor [2002] SGHC 241
An appellate court will not disturb the findings of fact of the court below unless they are clearly reached against the weight of the evidence, especially where the trial judge has had the opportunity to observe the demeanour of the witnesses.
Public Prosecutor v Syed Abdul Mutalip bin Syed Sidek and Another [2002] SGHC 24
The court held that the accused persons were in joint possession of drugs for the purpose of trafficking, as evidenced by their voluntary statements and forensic evidence, and that their acts were in furtherance of a common intention.
Mohammed Zairi Bin Mohamad Mohtar and Another v Public Prosecutor [2002] SGHC 23
An appellate court will defer to the trial judge’s findings of fact unless they are clearly wrong or against the weight of evidence, and a witness's credit being impeached does not mean all their evidence must be disregarded.
Public Prosecutor v Yeoh Aik Wei [2002] SGHC 225
The prosecution must prove that the accused knew or intended to bring the controlled drug into Singapore. The accused failed to rebut the presumption of knowledge under s 18(2) of the Misuse of Drugs Act.
Sarjit Singh s/o Mehar Singh v Public Prosecutor [2002] SGHC 217
In Sarjit Singh s/o Mehar Singh v PP [2002] SGHC 217, the High Court dismissed a petition for revision by an advocate convicted of criminal breach of trust. The Court enhanced his sentence to 36 months, emphasizing the severe fiduciary breach inherent in a lawyer's misappropriation of client funds.
Tan Choon Kin v Public Prosecutor [2002] SGHC 209
An appellate court will not disturb findings of fact unless they are clearly reached against the weight of the evidence, especially where the trial judge has had the benefit of observing the demeanour of witnesses.
Osman bin Ramli v Public Prosecutor [2002] SGHC 203
Mere presence in an unlawful assembly may constitute membership if the circumstances justify an inference that the accused shared the common object of the assembly.
Lim Chuan Huat and Another v Public Prosecutor [2002] SGHC 2
The court held that while the charges were duplicitous due to the phrase 'various occasions', the error was curable under s 396 of the Criminal Procedure Code as it did not cause a failure of justice or prejudice the appellants' defence. Furthermore, a joint trial was permissible
Low Lin Lin v Public Prosecutor [2002] SGHC 199
The court held that the presumption of possession under s 18(1) of the Misuse of Drugs Act can be invoked even if the accused does not have physical possession or control of the item, provided ownership is acknowledged and access is possible. The court also affirmed that a witnes
Hon Chi Wan Colman v Public Prosecutor [2002] SGHC 190
Sole dominion is not a necessary condition to establishing criminal breach of trust; general control and supervision over property is sufficient.
Mohd Ghalib s/o Sadruddin v Public Prosecutor [2002] SGHC 188
The court held that expert handwriting evidence, if unopposed and based on sound grounds, should be accepted. It also affirmed that the Prevention of Corruption Act (Cap 241) provides for heavier penalties than the Penal Code for giving false information to the CPIB.
Public Prosecutor v Azman bin Ismail and Others [2002] SGHC 178
The court held that the three accused persons were in possession of drugs for the purpose of trafficking based on their joint involvement in packing drugs at the apartment and their respective roles in the operation.
Public Prosecutor v Lam Chen Fong [2002] SGHC 160
In Public Prosecutor v Lam Chen Fong [2002] SGHC 160, the High Court sentenced the accused to 22 years imprisonment for criminal breach of trust and other offences, establishing that courts may order multiple consecutive sentences when numerous victims are involved.