NARESH KUMAR S/O NAGESVARAN v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

[2025] SGHC 165 High Court (General Division) 22 August 2025 • HC/MA 9220/2023/01 • 56 min read
21 cases cited (20 SG, 1 foreign)

Catchwords

Statutory Interpretation ? Penal statute ? Presumption of mens rea ? Whether presumption of mens rea approach should be departed from Criminal Law ? Statutory offences ? Enlistment Act ? Whether offence of pre-enlistee overstaying exit permit is strict liability offence Criminal Procedure and Sentencing ? Appeal ? Appeal against conviction and sentence ? Section 33(b) Enlistment Act (Cap 93, 2001 Rev Ed) Statutory Interpretation ? Construction of statute ? Presumption against retrospective operation ? Whether statutory defence of reasonable care intended to apply retroactively

Practice Areas

Statutory Interpretation ? Penal statute ? Presumption of mens rea ? Whether presumption of mens rea approach should be departed from Criminal Law ? Statutory offences ? Enlistment Act ? Whether offence of pre-enlistee overstaying exit permit is strict liability offence Criminal Procedure and Sentencing ? Appeal ? Appeal against conviction and sentence ? Section 33(b) Enlistment Act (Cap 93, 2001 Rev Ed) Statutory Interpretation ? Construction of statute ? Presumption against retrospective operation ? Whether statutory defence of reasonable care intended to apply retroactively

Judges (3)

Sundaresh Menon Coram Tay Yong Kwang Delivered Vincent Hoong Coram

Counsel (11)

Attorney-General's Chambers Firm Damodara Ong LLC Firm David Nayar and Associates Firm LVM Law Chambers LLC Firm Josephine Iezu Constan Counsel Appellant Kumaresan s/o Gohulabalan Counsel Respondent S.M. Sukhmit Singh Counsel Appellant Suresh s/o Damodara Counsel Appellant Susanna Abigail Yim Counsel Respondent Tan Kah Wai Counsel Applicant Tay Jia En (Dai Jia'En) Counsel Respondent

Parties (2)

Public Prosecutor Respondent Naresh Kumar s/o Nagesvaran Appellant

Case Significance

[2025] SGHC 165 is a High Court (General Division) decision dated 22 August 2025 concerning Criminal Law ? Statutory offences ? Enlistment Act ? Whether offence of pre-enlistee overstaying exit permit is strict liability offence, Criminal Procedure and Sentencing ? Appeal ? Appeal against conviction and sentence ? Section 33(b) Enlistment Act (Cap 93, 2001 Rev Ed), Statutory Interpretation ? Construction of statute ? Presumption against retrospective operation ? Whether statutory defence of reasonable care intended to apply retroactively, and Statutory Interpretation ? Penal statute ? Presumption of mens rea ? Whether presumption of mens rea approach should be departed from. The judgment was delivered by Tay Yong Kwang, with Sundaresh Menon and Vincent Hoong on the coram. The case was brought by Naresh Kumar s/o Nagesvaran (appellant) against Public Prosecutor (respondent). Legal representation was provided by Damodara Ong LLC and Attorney-General's Chambers. The judgment cites 21 cases (20 Singapore, 1 foreign) and references 8 statutory provisions, including the Criminal Law Reform Act, the Criminal Procedure Code, and the Endangered Species (Import and Export) Act.

Summary

A three-judge court considered whether the offence of overstaying an exit permit under the Enlistment Act was a strict liability offence and whether the statutory defence of reasonable care under s 26H(4) of the Penal Code applied retrospectively. The court held the offence was one of strict liability but that the reasonable care defence did not apply retrospectively to offences committed before 10 February 2020, and upheld the appellant's conviction and 14-week imprisonment sentence.

What was decided in [2025] SGHC 165?

[2025] SGHC 165 (NARESH KUMAR S/O NAGESVARAN v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR) is a High Court (General Division) decision from 22 August 2025 addressing Criminal Law ? Statutory offences ? Enlistment Act ? Whether offence of pre-enlistee overstaying exit permit is strict liability offence, Criminal Procedure and Sentencing ? Appeal ? Appeal against conviction and sentence ? Section 33(b) Enlistment Act (Cap 93, 2001 Rev Ed), Statutory Interpretation ? Construction of statute ? Presumption against retrospective operation ? Whether statutory defence of reasonable care intended to apply retroactively, and Statutory Interpretation ? Penal statute ? Presumption of mens rea ? Whether presumption of mens rea approach should be departed from. The judgment was delivered by Tay Yong Kwang.

Who were the parties in NARESH KUMAR S/O NAGESVARAN v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR?

The appellant in [2025] SGHC 165 was Naresh Kumar s/o Nagesvaran, and the respondent was Public Prosecutor. Legal representation included Damodara Ong LLC and Attorney-General's Chambers. The case was decided on 22 August 2025 in the High Court (General Division).

Which judge decided [2025] SGHC 165?

[2025] SGHC 165 was delivered by Tay Yong Kwang in the High Court (General Division) on 22 August 2025. Sundaresh Menon and Vincent Hoong also sat on the coram. The case concerned Criminal Law ? Statutory offences ? Enlistment Act ? Whether offence of pre-enlistee overstaying exit permit is strict liability offence, Criminal Procedure and Sentencing ? Appeal ? Appeal against conviction and sentence ? Section 33(b) Enlistment Act (Cap 93, 2001 Rev Ed), Statutory Interpretation ? Construction of statute ? Presumption against retrospective operation ? Whether statutory defence of reasonable care intended to apply retroactively, and Statutory Interpretation ? Penal statute ? Presumption of mens rea ? Whether presumption of mens rea approach should be departed from.

What cases and statutes does [2025] SGHC 165 cite?

[2025] SGHC 165 cites 21 prior decisions, including 1 from foreign jurisdictions. It references Criminal Law Reform Act, Criminal Procedure Code, Endangered Species (Import and Export) Act.

Statutes Cited

Criminal Law Reform Act
s 8
Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68)
s 230(1)(g)
Endangered Species (Import and Export) Act (Cap 92A)
Enlistment Act
s 32(1) s 33 s 33(b)
Interpretation Act (Cap 1)
s 9A(1)
Official Secrets Act (Cap 233)
s 5(1)
Penal Code (Cap 224)
s 26H(4)
Road Traffic Act (Cap 276)

Cases Cited (21)

SG (2)
[1998] SGHC 169 [2023] SGDC 291
SLR (18)
[1994] 3 SLR(R) 168 [1995] 1 SLR(R) 737 [1997] 3 SLR(R) 467 [2002] 2 SLR(R) 122 [2002] 2 SLR(R) 566 [2010] 3 SLR 489 [2011] 2 SLR 445 [2012] 3 SLR 648 [2015] 2 SLR 1129 [2016] 5 SLR 801 [2017] 2 SLR 1130 [2017] 2 SLR 850 [2017] 5 SLR 707 [2018] 1 SLR 659 [2019] 5 SLR 554 [2019] 5 SLR 654 [2022] 2 SLR 211 [2024] 6 SLR 277
UK (1)
[1985] AC 1

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.

Read on eLitigation

Source: eLitigation ([2025] SGHC 165)