Chandroo Subramaniam v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

Q: Which legislation does [2025] SGCA 37 consider?

The judgment refers to Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68), Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185), and Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

[2025] SGCA 37 Court of Appeal 25 July 2025 CA/CM 18/2025 19 min read

12 cases cited Cited by 1 case

Outcome

Application dismissed

I dismiss the application summarily without setting it down for a hearing pursuant to s 60G(8) of the SCJA.

Source: [2025] SGCA 37, Court of Appeal, decided 25 July 2025. Read directly from the judgment.

Key facts

Court	Court of Appeal
Decided	25 July 2025
Judge	Steven Chong
Charges / claim	Criminal Procedure and Sentencing
Outcome	Application dismissed
Counsel	Attorney-General's Chambers, Chin Jincheng, Jotham Tay

Source: [2025] SGCA 37, Court of Appeal, decided 25 July 2025 — eLitigation. Updated 3 July 2026.

Catchwords

Criminal Procedure and Sentencing — Sentencing — Execution — Stay of execution — Applicant seeking stay of execution to obtain fresh evidence — Whether permission to make post-appeal application in capital case should be granted — Section 60G Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1969 (2020 Rev Ed)

Practice Areas

Criminal Procedure and Sentencing

Judges (1)

Steven Chong Delivered

Counsel (3)

Attorney-General's Chambers Firm Chin Jincheng Counsel Respondent Jotham Tay Counsel Respondent

Parties (2)

Public Prosecutor Respondent Chandroo Subramaniam Applicant

Case Significance

[2025] SGCA 37 is a Court of Appeal decision dated 25 July 2025 concerning Criminal Procedure and Sentencing, specifically addressing sentencing. The judgment was delivered by Steven Chong. The case was brought by Chandroo Subramaniam (applicant) against Public Prosecutor (respondent). Legal representation was provided by Attorney-General's Chambers. The judgment cites 12 cases and references 3 statutory provisions, including the Criminal Procedure Code, the Misuse of Drugs Act, and the Supreme Court of Judicature Act. This decision has been cited by 1 subsequent judgment in the dataset.

[2025] SGCA 37 explained

Chandroo Subramaniam v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ([2025] SGCA 37) is a Singapore judgment decided by the Court of Appeal on 25 July 2025. 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 [2025] SGCA 37 about?

Chandroo Subramaniam v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ([2025] SGCA 37) is a Court of Appeal decision from 2025. Its published catchwords are “Criminal Procedure and Sentencing — Sentencing — Execution — Stay of execution — Applicant seeking stay of execution to obtain fresh evidence — Whether permission to make post-appeal application in capital case should be granted — Section 60G Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1969 (2020 Rev Ed)”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.

Which legislation does [2025] SGCA 37 consider?

The judgment refers to Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68), Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185), and Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

What earlier Singapore cases does [2025] SGCA 37 cite?

Among the in-corpus authorities it refers to are [2025] SGHC 20, [2024] SGCA 56, and [2024] SGCA 40. The complete list of cases cited, and of later cases that cite this decision, is shown on this page.

How influential is [2025] SGCA 37?

Within this corpus, [2025] SGCA 37 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

Chandroo Subramaniam, a prisoner awaiting capital punishment for conspiring to traffic not less than 1,344.5g of cannabis, applied for a stay of execution one day before his scheduled execution date, claiming he needed time to obtain evidence from a recently located witness. The application was summarily dismissed, as no new material was placed before the court and the existing evidence overwhelmingly supported the conviction. Counsel was personally ordered to pay $3,000 in costs to the Prosecution for filing the completely unmeritorious last-minute application.

What was decided in [2025] SGCA 37?

[2025] SGCA 37 (Chandroo Subramaniam v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR) is a Court of Appeal decision from 25 July 2025 addressing Criminal Procedure and Sentencing, specifically sentencing. The judgment was delivered by Steven Chong.

Who were the parties in Chandroo Subramaniam v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ([2025] SGCA 37)?

The applicant in [2025] SGCA 37 was Chandroo Subramaniam, and the respondent was Public Prosecutor. Legal representation included Attorney-General's Chambers. The case was decided on 25 July 2025 in the Court of Appeal.

Which judge decided [2025] SGCA 37?

[2025] SGCA 37 was delivered by Steven Chong in the Court of Appeal on 25 July 2025. The case concerned Criminal Procedure and Sentencing.

What cases and statutes does [2025] SGCA 37 cite?

[2025] SGCA 37 cites 12 prior decisions. It references Criminal Procedure Code, Misuse of Drugs Act, Supreme Court of Judicature Act. The decision has itself been cited by 1 subsequent judgment.