HAJI MUHAMMAD FAISAL BIN JOHAR v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
Outcome
Appeal dismissedI dismiss the appeal against conviction and sentence.
Source: [2025] SGHC 102, High Court (General Division), decided 28 May 2025. Read directly from the judgment.
Key facts
| Court | High Court (General Division) |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judge | See Kee Oon |
| Charges / claim | Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure and Sentencing |
| Outcome | Appeal dismissed |
| Counsel | Allen & Gledhill LLP, Attorney-General's Chambers, Huo Jiongrui, Jason Chan, Marcus Foo, Megan Chua |
Source: [2025] SGHC 102, High Court (General Division), decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Counsel (6)
Case Significance
[2025] SGHC 102 is a High Court (General Division) decision dated 28 May 2025 concerning Criminal Law and Criminal Procedure and Sentencing, specifically addressing appeal, offences, and sentencing. The judgment was delivered by See Kee Oon. The case was brought by Haji Muhammad Faisal Bin Johar (appellant) against Public Prosecutor (respondent). Legal representation was provided by Allen & Gledhill LLP and Attorney-General's Chambers. The judgment cites 11 cases (10 Singapore, 1 foreign) and references 3 statutory provisions, including the Criminal Procedure Code, the Evidence Act, and the Penal Code. This decision has been cited by 1 subsequent judgment in the dataset.
[2025] SGHC 102 explained
HAJI MUHAMMAD FAISAL BIN JOHAR v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ([2025] SGHC 102) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (General Division) on 28 May 2025. It is categorised under Criminal Law and 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] SGHC 102 about?
HAJI MUHAMMAD FAISAL BIN JOHAR v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ([2025] SGHC 102) is a High Court (General Division) decision from 2025. Its published catchwords are “Criminal Law — Appeal”, “Criminal Law — Offences — Outrage of modesty”, and “Criminal Procedure and Sentencing — Sentencing”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.
Which legislation does [2025] SGHC 102 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 [2025] SGHC 102?
Within this corpus, [2025] SGHC 102 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
A gym instructor at the Singapore Island Country Club appealed against his conviction on two charges of outrage of modesty committed during a massage session with a 20-year-old client. The court dismissed the appeal against both conviction and sentence of 20 months' imprisonment and three strokes of the cane, finding the complainant was a credible and unusually convincing witness despite certain difficulties with her evidence about the precise nature of contact.
What was decided in [2025] SGHC 102?
[2025] SGHC 102 (HAJI MUHAMMAD FAISAL BIN JOHAR v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR) is a High Court (General Division) decision from 28 May 2025 addressing Criminal Law and Criminal Procedure and Sentencing, specifically appeal, offences, and sentencing. The judgment was delivered by See Kee Oon.
Who were the parties in HAJI MUHAMMAD FAISAL BIN JOHAR v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ([2025] SGHC 102)?
The appellant in [2025] SGHC 102 was Haji Muhammad Faisal Bin Johar, and the respondent was Public Prosecutor. Legal representation included Allen & Gledhill LLP and Attorney-General's Chambers. The case was decided on 28 May 2025 in the High Court (General Division).
Which judge decided [2025] SGHC 102?
[2025] SGHC 102 was delivered by See Kee Oon in the High Court (General Division) on 28 May 2025. The case concerned Criminal Law and Criminal Procedure and Sentencing.
What cases and statutes does [2025] SGHC 102 cite?
[2025] SGHC 102 cites 11 prior decisions, including 1 from foreign jurisdictions. It references Criminal Procedure Code, Evidence Act, Penal Code. The decision has itself been cited by 1 subsequent judgment.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (11)
Cited By (1)
Related cases
Other Singapore judgments involving the same parties or counsel.
Referenced in
Statutes interpreted in this judgment
Legal concepts & references
Sentencing outcomes for this offence
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2025] SGHC 102)