VANG SHUIMING v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

Q: Which legislation does [2023] SGHC 289 consider?

The judgment refers to Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68) and Penal Code (Cap 224). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

[2023] SGHC 289 High Court (General Division) 12 October 2023 HC/CR 6/2023 17 min read

8 cases cited Cited by 1 case

Key facts

Court	High Court (General Division)
Decided	12 October 2023
Judge	Vincent Hoong
Charges / claim	Criminal Procedure and Sentencing
Counsel	Attorney-General's Chambers, Drew & Napier LLC, Andrew Chua Ruiming, David Koh, Dorothy Grace Tan Jun Wen, Wong Hin Pkin Wendell, Yang Xinyan

Source: [2023] SGHC 289, High Court (General Division), decided 12 October 2023 — eLitigation. Updated 10 July 2026.

Catchwords

Criminal Procedure and Sentencing — Bail Criminal Procedure and Sentencing — Revision of proceedings

Practice Areas

Criminal Procedure and Sentencing

Judges (1)

Vincent Hoong Delivered

Counsel (7)

Attorney-General's Chambers Firm Drew & Napier LLC Firm Andrew Chua Ruiming Counsel Applicant David Koh Counsel Respondent Dorothy Grace Tan Jun Wen Counsel Applicant Wong Hin Pkin Wendell Counsel Applicant Yang Xinyan Counsel Applicant

Parties (2)

Public Prosecutor Respondent Vang Shuiming Applicant

Case Significance

Vang Shuiming v Public Prosecutor [2023] SGHC 289 is an ex tempore judgment of Vincent Hoong J in the General Division of the High Court, delivered on 12 October 2023 in Criminal Revision No 6 of 2023. The applicant, Mr Vang Shuiming, faces five charges, one under s 471 punishable under s 465 of the Penal Code and four under s 54(1)(c) of the Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act 1992, arising from an investigation into money-laundering and forgery, and had been in remand since his arrest on 15 August 2023. Having been denied bail at a District Court review hearing on 29 September 2023, he applied for the High Court to exercise its revisionary powers under s 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code to revoke the District Court's order and grant him bail.

[2023] SGHC 289 explained

VANG SHUIMING v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ([2023] SGHC 289) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (General Division) on 12 October 2023. It is categorised under Criminal Procedure and Sentencing. 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 289 about?

VANG SHUIMING v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ([2023] SGHC 289) is a High Court (General Division) decision from 2023. Its published catchwords are “Criminal Procedure and Sentencing — Bail” and “Criminal Procedure and Sentencing — Revision of proceedings”, 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 289 consider?

The judgment refers to Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68) and Penal Code (Cap 224). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

What earlier Singapore cases does [2023] SGHC 289 cite?

Among the in-corpus authorities it refers to are [2023] SGHC 248. The complete list of cases cited, and of later cases that cite this decision, is shown on this page.

How influential is [2023] SGHC 289?

Within this corpus, [2023] SGHC 289 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

Vang Shuiming, who faced one forgery-related charge under the Penal Code and four charges under s 54(1)(c) of the Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act arising from a money-laundering investigation, applied under s 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code for the High Court to revoke a District Court order denying him bail. The issue was whether that order was palpably wrong such that serious injustice resulted. Finding the threshold not met, the High Court dismissed the application.

What was Vang Shuiming v Public Prosecutor [2023] SGHC 289 about?

It was a criminal revision before Vincent Hoong J in which Mr Vang Shuiming, remanded since 15 August 2023 on forgery and money-laundering-related charges, sought to have the High Court revoke a District Court order denying him bail, decided on 12 October 2023.

What did the applicant seek in [2023] SGHC 289?

Mr Vang applied for the High Court to exercise its revisionary powers under s 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code to revoke the District Court's 29 September 2023 order denying him bail and to grant him bail, while facing five Penal Code and CDSA charges.