PUBLIC PROSECUTOR v CIC

Q: Which legislation does [2025] SGHC 36 consider?

The judgment refers to Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68), Evidence Act (Cap 97), Films Act, and Penal Code (Cap 224). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

[2025] SGHC 36 High Court (General Division) 5 March 2025 HC/CC 56/2023 51 min read

14 cases cited (11 SG, 3 foreign)

Outcome

Convicted

I convicted the accused on the charge of sexual assault involving penetration under s 376(2)(a) of the Penal Code.

Source: [2025] SGHC 36, High Court (General Division), decided 5 March 2025. Read directly from the judgment.

Key facts

Court	High Court (General Division)
Decided	5 March 2025
Judge	Aidan Xu @ Aedit Abdullah
Charges / claim	Evidence, Criminal Law
Outcome	Convicted
Counsel	Attorney-General's Chambers, Eugene Thuraisingam LLP, Chu Sin Ping Natalie, Ng Clare Sophia, Niranjan Ranjakunalan, Sarah Siaw Ming Hui, Suang Wijaya, Tung Shou Pin, Wong Woon Kwong

Source: [2025] SGHC 36, High Court (General Division), decided 5 March 2025 — eLitigation. Updated 3 July 2026.

Catchwords

Evidence — Witnesses — Corroboration Criminal Law — Offences — Sexual offences

Practice Areas

Evidence Criminal Law

Judges (1)

Aidan Xu @ Aedit Abdullah Delivered

Counsel (9)

Attorney-General's Chambers Firm Eugene Thuraisingam LLP Firm Chu Sin Ping Natalie Counsel Plaintiff Ng Clare Sophia Counsel Defendant Niranjan Ranjakunalan Counsel Plaintiff Sarah Siaw Ming Hui Counsel Plaintiff Suang Wijaya Counsel Defendant Tung Shou Pin Counsel Plaintiff Wong Woon Kwong Counsel Plaintiff

Parties (2)

Public Prosecutor Plaintiff CIC Defendant

Case Significance

[2025] SGHC 36 is a High Court (General Division) decision dated 5 March 2025 concerning Criminal Law and Evidence, specifically addressing witnesses and offences. The judgment was delivered by Aidan Xu @ Aedit Abdullah. The case was brought by Public Prosecutor (plaintiff) against CIC (defendant). Legal representation was provided by Attorney-General's Chambers and Eugene Thuraisingam LLP. The judgment cites 14 cases (11 Singapore, 3 foreign) and references 4 statutory provisions, including the Criminal Procedure Code, the Evidence Act, and the Films Act.

[2025] SGHC 36 explained

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR v CIC ([2025] SGHC 36) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (General Division) on 5 March 2025. It is categorised under Evidence and Criminal Law. It is a recent decision; within this corpus no later judgment has cited it yet. 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 36 about?

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR v CIC ([2025] SGHC 36) is a High Court (General Division) decision from 2025. Its published catchwords are “Evidence — Witnesses — Corroboration” 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 [2025] SGHC 36 consider?

The judgment refers to Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68), Evidence Act (Cap 97), Films Act, and Penal Code (Cap 224). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

Summary

The accused, the victim's granduncle by marriage, was convicted after trial of sexual assault involving penetration of a 12-year-old victim in a company lorry at a petrol station. The court sentenced him to 13.5 years' imprisonment plus six months in lieu of caning, finding that the abuse of his position of trust as a family elder and the victim's young age and psychological harm warranted a substantial term.

What was decided in [2025] SGHC 36?

[2025] SGHC 36 (PUBLIC PROSECUTOR v CIC) is a High Court (General Division) decision from 5 March 2025 addressing Criminal Law and Evidence, specifically witnesses and offences. The judgment was delivered by Aidan Xu @ Aedit Abdullah.

Who were the parties in PUBLIC PROSECUTOR v CIC ([2025] SGHC 36)?

The plaintiff in [2025] SGHC 36 was Public Prosecutor, and the defendant was CIC. Legal representation included Eugene Thuraisingam LLP and Attorney-General's Chambers. The case was decided on 5 March 2025 in the High Court (General Division).

Which judge decided [2025] SGHC 36?

[2025] SGHC 36 was delivered by Aidan Xu @ Aedit Abdullah in the High Court (General Division) on 5 March 2025. The case concerned Criminal Law and Evidence.