PUBLIC PROSECUTOR v CJK
Key facts
| Court | High Court (General Division) |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judge | Audrey Lim |
| Charges / claim | Criminal Law |
| Counsel | Attorney-General's Chambers, Oon & Bazul LLP, Christina Koh, Eoon Zizhen Benedict (Wen Zhizhen), Niranjan Ranjakunalan, Tanjeetpal Singh Khaira, Yee Jia Rong |
Source: [2024] SGHC 175, High Court (General Division), decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Counsel (7)
Parties (2)
Case Significance
Public Prosecutor v CJK [2024] SGHC 175 was a criminal trial in the General Division of the High Court before Audrey Lim J, who delivered the grounds of decision on 9 July 2024 in Criminal Case No 19 of 2024, following hearings across 2-5, 23 and 25-26 April and 14 and 26 June 2024. The accused (referred to as "D") faced three charges of sexual offences relating to the complainant ("V"). The judgment records that V's mother ("K") was at the material time in a romantic relationship with the accused, and that V and K resided at a flat where the alleged offences occurred in 2014.
As set out in the judgment, the first charge alleged rape of V, a female then under 14 years old, in the living room of the flat in 2014, contrary to s 375(1)(b) and punishable under s 375(3)(b) of the Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed). The second and third charges alleged the use of criminal force to outrage V's modesty, punishable under s 354(2) of the Penal Code, on two separate occasions in 2014. The catchwords identify the issues as Criminal Law — Offences — Rape and Criminal Law — Offences — Sexual offences. The prosecution was conducted by counsel from the Attorney-General's Chambers, including Ms Christina Koh, Mr Niranjan Ranjakunalan and Mr Yee Jia Rong, while the defence was conducted by counsel from Oon & Bazul LLP, including Mr Tanjeetpal Singh Khaira and Mr Eoon Zizhen Benedict (Wen Zhizhen).
[2024] SGHC 175 explained
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR v CJK ([2024] SGHC 175) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (General Division) on 9 July 2024. 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 [2024] SGHC 175 about?
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR v CJK ([2024] SGHC 175) is a High Court (General Division) decision from 2024. Its published catchwords are “Criminal Law — Offences — Rape” and “Criminal Law — Offences — Sexual offences”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.
Which legislation does [2024] SGHC 175 consider?
The judgment refers to Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68), Evidence Act (Cap 97), and Penal Code (Cap 224). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.
How influential is [2024] SGHC 175?
Within this corpus, [2024] SGHC 175 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
The Accused faced three charges of sexual offences relating to the Complainant, the daughter of a woman with whom he was in a romantic relationship, alleged to have occurred in 2014 at the family's flat when the Complainant was under 14 years old, comprising one charge of rape and two charges of using criminal force intending to outrage her modesty under the Penal Code. The Accused initially indicated he would admit to the second and third charges but later qualified his admissions, which Audrey Lim J declined to accept. The court found the Prosecution had proved all three charges beyond reasonable doubt and convicted the Accused, stating that the appropriate sentence would be determined after hearing further submissions.
What was Public Prosecutor v CJK [2024] SGHC 175 about?
It was a High Court criminal trial in which the accused, referred to as "D", faced three charges of sexual offences, including rape and outrage of modesty, relating to a complainant who was under 14 years old when the alleged offences occurred in 2014.
What charges did the accused face in Public Prosecutor v CJK ([2024] SGHC 175)?
The accused faced a rape charge under s 375(1)(b), punishable under s 375(3)(b) of the Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed), and two charges of using criminal force to outrage modesty under s 354(2), all relating to a girl under 14 in 2014.
Who decided Public Prosecutor v CJK [2024] SGHC 175?
Audrey Lim J of the General Division of the High Court of Singapore decided Criminal Case No 19 of 2024, delivering the grounds of decision on 9 July 2024 after hearings across April and June 2024.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (7)
Cited By (1)
Related cases
Other Singapore judgments involving the same parties or counsel.
Referenced in
Statutes interpreted in this judgment
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2024] SGHC 175)