CEO v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

[2025] SGCA 18 Court of Appeal 25 April 2025 CA/CCA 3/2024 · CA/CM 44/2024 · CA/CM 1/2025

9 cases cited (8 SG, 1 foreign)

Key facts

Court	Court of Appeal
Decided	25 April 2025
Judges	Belinda Ang Saw Ean, See Kee Oon, Sundaresh Menon
Charges / claim	Criminal Law, Abuse of Process, Criminal Procedure and Sentencing
Counsel	Attorney-General's Chambers, Withers KhattarWong LLP, Ang Siok Chen, Chenthil Kumar Kumarasingam, Eugene Lee, Sruthi Boppana, Tan Jia Yi, Zephan Chua Wei En

Source: [2025] SGCA 18, Court of Appeal, decided 25 April 2025 — eLitigation. Updated 3 July 2026.

Catchwords

Criminal Law — Offences — Rape Abuse of Process — Collateral purpose Criminal Procedure and Sentencing — Appeal — Adducing fresh evidence Criminal Procedure and Sentencing — Trials — Whether accused person received inadequate legal assistance from trial counsel

Practice Areas

Criminal Law Abuse of Process Criminal Procedure and Sentencing

Judges (3)

Belinda Ang Saw Ean Coram See Kee Oon Delivered Sundaresh Menon Coram

Counsel (8)

Attorney-General's Chambers Firm Withers KhattarWong LLP Firm Ang Siok Chen Counsel for the respondent Chenthil Kumar Kumarasingam Counsel for the appellant

Eugene Lee Counsel for the respondent

Sruthi Boppana Counsel for the respondent Tan Jia Yi Counsel for the appellant Zephan Chua Wei En Counsel for the appellant

Parties (2)

Public Prosecutor Respondent

CEO Appellant

Case Significance

[2025] SGCA 18 is a Court of Appeal decision dated 25 April 2025 concerning Abuse of Process, Criminal Law, and Criminal Procedure and Sentencing, specifically addressing offences, collateral purpose, and appeal. The judgment was delivered by See Kee Oon, with Belinda Ang Saw Ean and Sundaresh Menon on the coram. The case was brought by CEO (appellant) against Public Prosecutor (respondent). Legal representation was provided by Withers KhattarWong LLP and Attorney-General's Chambers. The judgment cites 9 cases (8 Singapore, 1 foreign) and references 3 statutory provisions, including the Criminal Procedure Code, the Evidence Act, and the Penal Code.

Summary

CEO appealed against his conviction for abetment by conspiracy to commit rape under s 375(1)(a) of the Penal Code, for which he was sentenced to 13 years' imprisonment and 12 strokes of the cane. On appeal, he challenged the reliance on his video-recorded interviews and post-incident communications, sought to adduce fresh evidence, and alleged his trial counsel was negligent and incompetent. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and both criminal motions, finding the challenges without merit and the sentence appropriate.

What was decided in [2025] SGCA 18?

[2025] SGCA 18 (CEO v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR) is a Court of Appeal decision from 25 April 2025 addressing Abuse of Process, Criminal Law, and Criminal Procedure and Sentencing, specifically offences, collateral purpose, and appeal. The judgment was delivered by See Kee Oon.

Who were the parties in CEO v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ([2025] SGCA 18)?

The appellant in [2025] SGCA 18 was CEO, and the respondent was Public Prosecutor. Legal representation included Withers KhattarWong LLP and Attorney-General's Chambers. The case was decided on 25 April 2025 in the Court of Appeal.

Which judge decided [2025] SGCA 18?

[2025] SGCA 18 was delivered by See Kee Oon in the Court of Appeal on 25 April 2025. Belinda Ang Saw Ean and Sundaresh Menon also sat on the coram. The case concerned Abuse of Process, Criminal Law, and Criminal Procedure and Sentencing.