PUBLIC PROSECUTOR v Tan Yew Sin

Q: Which legislation does [2023] SGHC 136 consider?

The judgment refers to Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68), Evidence Act (Cap 97), Penal Code (Cap 224), and Public Entertainments Act (Cap 257), among other provisions. The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

[2023] SGHC 136 High Court (General Division) 12 May 2023 HC/CC 36/2019 105 min read

9 cases cited Cited by 1 case

Outcome

Acquitted

I therefore acquitted the accused of all three charges.

Source: [2023] SGHC 136, High Court (General Division), decided 12 May 2023. Read directly from the judgment.

Key facts

Court	High Court (General Division)
Decided	12 May 2023
Judge	Pang Khang Chau
Charges / claim	Criminal Law
Outcome	Acquitted
Counsel	Attorney-General's Chambers, Withers KhattarWong LLP, Adeline Goh Peizhi, Chenthil Kumarasingam, Emily Koh, Muhamad Imaduddien, Tan Yen Seow

Source: [2023] SGHC 136, High Court (General Division), decided 12 May 2023 — eLitigation. Updated 10 July 2026.

Catchwords

Criminal Law — Offences — Rape Criminal Law — Offences — Sexual offences Criminal Law — Offences — Outrage of modesty Criminal Law — General exceptions — Mistake of fact

Practice Areas

Criminal Law

Judges (1)

Pang Khang Chau Delivered

Counsel (7)

Attorney-General's Chambers Firm Withers KhattarWong LLP Firm Adeline Goh Peizhi Counsel Accused Chenthil Kumarasingam Counsel Accused Emily Koh Counsel Prosecution Muhamad Imaduddien Counsel Prosecution Tan Yen Seow Counsel Prosecution

Parties (2)

Public Prosecutor Prosecutor Tan Yew Sin Accused

Case Significance

Public Prosecutor v Tan Yew Sin [2023] SGHC 136 is the grounds of decision of Pang Khang Chau J in the General Division of the High Court, delivered on 12 May 2023 in Criminal Case No 36 of 2019. The accused, a private-hire vehicle driver, faced three charges arising from sexual acts with the complainant in his car after driving her home in the early hours of 19 May 2018: sexual assault by digital-vaginal penetration under s 376(2)(a) of the Penal Code, attempted rape under s 375(1)(a) read with s 511, and outrage of modesty under s 354(1). He claimed the acts were consensual. Pang Khang Chau J acquitted the accused of all charges, and the Prosecution has appealed.

[2023] SGHC 136 explained

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR v Tan Yew Sin ([2023] SGHC 136) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (General Division) on 12 May 2023. It is categorised under Criminal Law. Within this corpus it has since been cited by 1 other reported Singapore judgment, 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] SGHC 136 about?

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR v Tan Yew Sin ([2023] SGHC 136) is a High Court (General Division) decision from 2023. Its published catchwords are “Criminal Law — Offences — Rape”, “Criminal Law — Offences — Sexual offences”, “Criminal Law — Offences — Outrage of modesty”, and “Criminal Law — General exceptions — Mistake of fact”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.

Which legislation does [2023] SGHC 136 consider?

The judgment refers to Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68), Evidence Act (Cap 97), Penal Code (Cap 224), and Public Entertainments Act (Cap 257), among other provisions. The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

How influential is [2023] SGHC 136?

Within this corpus, [2023] SGHC 136 has been cited by 1 later reported Singapore judgment. 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

Tan Yew Sin, a private hire driver, faced three Penal Code charges arising from sexual acts with an intoxicated passenger in his car: sexual assault by digital penetration under section 376(2)(a), attempted rape under section 375(1)(a) read with section 511, and outrage of modesty under section 354(1). He admitted the acts but claimed they were consensual. The court found the defence of mistake of fact under section 79 was made out and acquitted him of all three charges.

What did the court decide in Public Prosecutor v Tan Yew Sin [2023] SGHC 136?

Pang Khang Chau J acquitted the accused, Tan Yew Sin, of all three charges of sexual assault, attempted rape and outrage of modesty, accepting the sexual acts were consensual. The Prosecution has since appealed. The grounds were delivered on 12 May 2023.

What charges did Tan Yew Sin face in [2023] SGHC 136?

He faced three charges arising from acts in his car on 19 May 2018: sexual assault by digital-vaginal penetration under s 376(2)(a) of the Penal Code, attempted rape under s 375(1)(a) read with s 511, and outrage of modesty under s 354(1).