CHANDER KUMAR A/L JAYAGARAN v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

Q: Which legislation does [2023] SGCA 35 consider?

The judgment refers to Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68), Evidence Act (Cap 97), and Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

[2023] SGCA 35 Court of Appeal 31 October 2023 CA/CM 40/2023 14 min read

9 cases cited (8 SG, 1 foreign) Cited by 2 cases

Key facts

Court	Court of Appeal
Decided	31 October 2023
Judge	Tay Yong Kwang
Charges / claim	Criminal procedure and sentencing, Criminal law

Source: [2023] SGCA 35, Court of Appeal, decided 31 October 2023 — eLitigation. Updated 10 July 2026.

Catchwords

Criminal procedure and sentencing — Criminal review Criminal law — Statutory offences — Misuse of Drugs Act

Practice Areas

Criminal procedure and sentencing Criminal law

Judges (1)

Tay Yong Kwang Delivered

Parties (2)

Public Prosecutor Respondent Chander Kumar a/l Jayagaran Applicant

Case Significance

Chander Kumar a/l Jayagaran v Public Prosecutor [2023] SGCA 35 is a judgment of Tay Yong Kwang JCA in the Court of Appeal, delivered on 31 October 2023 in Criminal Motion No 40 of 2023. The applicant, Chander Kumar a/l Jayagaran, applied under section 394H(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code 2010 for permission to make an application to review the earlier Court of Appeal decision in Ramesh a/l Perumal v Public Prosecutor and another appeal [2019] 1 SLR 1003. This was the applicant's second such application, an earlier application (CM 37 of 2020) having been dismissed summarily on 18 January 2021 in Chander Kumar a/l Jayagaran v Public Prosecutor [2021] SGCA 3; the underlying charges concerned trafficking in diamorphine under the Misuse of Drugs Act.

[2023] SGCA 35 explained

CHANDER KUMAR A/L JAYAGARAN v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ([2023] SGCA 35) is a Singapore judgment decided by the Court of Appeal on 31 October 2023. It is categorised under Criminal procedure and sentencing and Criminal law. Within this corpus it has since been cited by 2 other reported Singapore judgments, a measure of how often later decisions have referred to it. This page summarises what the reported decision covers and links the primary sources — the full judgment, the statutes it cites, and the other cases it engages with — so the decision can be read in context. It is reference information, not legal advice, and it does not state the outcome or any holding beyond what the official judgment records.

What is [2023] SGCA 35 about?

CHANDER KUMAR A/L JAYAGARAN v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ([2023] SGCA 35) is a Court of Appeal decision from 2023. Its published catchwords are “Criminal procedure and sentencing — Criminal review” and “Criminal law — Statutory offences — Misuse of Drugs Act”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.

Which legislation does [2023] SGCA 35 consider?

The judgment refers to Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68), Evidence Act (Cap 97), and Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

What earlier Singapore cases does [2023] SGCA 35 cite?

Among the in-corpus authorities it refers to are [2023] SGCA 13. The complete list of cases cited, and of later cases that cite this decision, is shown on this page.

How influential is [2023] SGCA 35?

Within this corpus, [2023] SGCA 35 has been cited by 2 later reported Singapore judgments. That count reflects references from other decisions held in this corpus only and is a conservative lower bound on how often the case has actually been cited.

Summary

Chander Kumar a/l Jayagaran applied under s 394H of the Criminal Procedure Code for permission to review an earlier Court of Appeal decision concerning drug charges under the Misuse of Drugs Act, this being his second such application after an earlier one was dismissed. The court found the repeat application to be an abuse of process and dismissed it summarily, also setting out a registry procedure to address repetitive review filings.

What was Chander Kumar a/l Jayagaran v Public Prosecutor [2023] SGCA 35 about?

It was an application by Chander Kumar a/l Jayagaran before Tay Yong Kwang JCA under section 394H(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code for permission to review the earlier Court of Appeal decision in Ramesh a/l Perumal, decided on 31 October 2023.

Why was [2023] SGCA 35 the applicant's second review application?

The applicant had earlier filed CM 37 of 2020, also seeking permission to review Ramesh (CA), which was dismissed summarily on 18 January 2021 in [2021] SGCA 3, making Criminal Motion No 40 of 2023 his second permission-to-review application.