GII v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

[2025] SGHC 38 High Court (General Division) 6 March 2025 • HC/MA 9153/2023/01 • 48 min read
18 cases cited Cited by 1 case

Catchwords

Criminal Law — Appeal Criminal Law — Offences — Outrage of modesty — Whether the complainant’s testimony was unusually convincing

Practice Areas

Criminal Law

Judges (1)

Sundaresh Menon Delivered

Counsel (7)

Attorney-General's Chambers Firm WongPartnership LLP Firm Benedict Chan Wei Qi Counsel Respondent Calvin Ong Yik Lin Counsel Appellant Chin Jincheng Counsel Respondent Paul Loy Chi Syann Counsel Appellant Tan Darius Counsel Appellant

Parties (2)

Public Prosecutor Respondent GII Appellant

Case Significance

[2025] SGHC 38 is a High Court (General Division) decision dated 6 March 2025 concerning Criminal Law, specifically addressing appeal and offences. The judgment was delivered by Sundaresh Menon. The case was brought by GII (appellant) against Public Prosecutor (respondent). Legal representation was provided by WongPartnership LLP and Attorney-General's Chambers. The judgment cites 18 cases 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.

Summary

A man appealed against his conviction for aggravated outrage of modesty under s 354A(1) of the Penal Code and his 50-month imprisonment sentence, maintaining he did not remember the events as he was heavily intoxicated. The Chief Justice dismissed the appeal, upholding the complainant's testimony as unusually convincing and addressing the evidentiary treatment when an accused claims no memory of the alleged offence rather than advancing a competing account.

What was decided in [2025] SGHC 38?

[2025] SGHC 38 (GII v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR) is a High Court (General Division) decision from 6 March 2025 addressing Criminal Law, specifically appeal and offences. The judgment was delivered by Sundaresh Menon.

Who were the parties in GII v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR?

The appellant in [2025] SGHC 38 was GII, and the respondent was Public Prosecutor. Legal representation included WongPartnership LLP and Attorney-General's Chambers. The case was decided on 6 March 2025 in the High Court (General Division).

Which judge decided [2025] SGHC 38?

[2025] SGHC 38 was delivered by Sundaresh Menon in the High Court (General Division) on 6 March 2025. The case concerned Criminal Law.

What cases and statutes does [2025] SGHC 38 cite?

[2025] SGHC 38 cites 18 prior decisions. It references Criminal Procedure Code, Evidence Act, Penal Code. The decision has itself been cited by 1 subsequent judgment.

Statutes Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68)
s 390(4)
Evidence Act (Cap 97)
s 136 s 154
Penal Code (Cap 224)
s 354(1) s 354A(1)

Cases Cited (18)

SG (4)
[2013] SGCA 20 [2018] SGHC 72 [2021] SGHC 46 [2024] SGDC 30
SLR (14)
[1999] 2 SLR(R) 936 [2002] 1 SLR(R) 326 [2005] 2 SLR(R) 236 [2006] 4 SLR(R) 45 [2007] 1 SLR(R) 292 [2008] 4 SLR(R) 686 [2016] 5 SLR 636 [2018] 1 SLR 499 [2018] 2 SLR 1087 [2019] 2 SLR 490 [2020] 1 SLR 486 [2020] 2 SLR 1375 [2020] 5 SLR 1130 [2024] 6 SLR 507

Cited By (1)

[2025] SGHC 262
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR v Ramalingam Selvasekaran

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.

Read on eLitigation

Source: eLitigation ([2025] SGHC 38)