Lingkesvaran Rajendaren v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

Q: Which legislation does [2026] SGCA 5 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.

[2026] SGCA 5 Court of Appeal 11 February 2026 CA/OAC 2/2026 9 min read

10 cases cited Cited by 1 case

Outcome

Application dismissed

I dismiss the Application summarily without setting it down for hearing.

Source: [2026] SGCA 5, Court of Appeal, decided 11 February 2026. Read directly from the judgment.

Key facts

Court	Court of Appeal
Decided	11 February 2026
Judge	Woo Bih Li
Charges / claim	Criminal Procedure and Sentencing
Outcome	Application dismissed
Counsel	Attorney-General's Chambers, Anandan s/o Bala, Foo Yang Yi, Theong Li Han

Source: [2026] SGCA 5, Court of Appeal, decided 11 February 2026 — eLitigation. Updated 10 July 2026.

Catchwords

Criminal Procedure and Sentencing - Stay of execution

Practice Areas

Criminal Procedure and Sentencing

Judges (1)

Woo Bih Li Delivered

Counsel (4)

Attorney-General's Chambers Firm Anandan s/o Bala Counsel Respondent Foo Yang Yi Counsel Respondent Theong Li Han Counsel Respondent

Parties (2)

Public Prosecutor Respondent Lingkesvaran Rajendaren Applicant

Case Significance

[2026] SGCA 5 is a Court of Appeal decision dated 11 February 2026 concerning Criminal Procedure and Sentencing, specifically addressing stay of execution. The judgment was delivered by Woo Bih Li. The case was brought by Lingkesvaran Rajendaren (applicant) against Public Prosecutor (respondent). Legal representation was provided by Attorney-General's Chambers. The judgment cites 10 cases and references 3 statutory provisions, including the Criminal Procedure Code, the Misuse of Drugs Act, and the Supreme Court of Judicature Act.

[2026] SGCA 5 explained

Lingkesvaran Rajendaren v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ([2026] SGCA 5) is a Singapore judgment decided by the Court of Appeal on 11 February 2026. 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 [2026] SGCA 5 about?

Lingkesvaran Rajendaren v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ([2026] SGCA 5) is a Court of Appeal decision from 2026. Its published catchwords are “Criminal Procedure and Sentencing - Stay of execution”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.

Which legislation does [2026] SGCA 5 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 [2026] SGCA 5 cite?

Among the in-corpus authorities it refers to are [2026] SGCA 4. The complete list of cases cited, and of later cases that cite this decision, is shown on this page.

How influential is [2026] SGCA 5?

Within this corpus, [2026] SGCA 5 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

Hours before his scheduled execution, the applicant filed handwritten submissions seeking permission for a post-appeal application claiming his trial was unfair because witness statements were not translated to him, alleging a break in the chain of custody of drugs. The court summarily dismissed the application, finding it was an eleventh-hour attempt to delay execution with no reasonable prospect of success, as the applicant's own defence at trial had been that he did not know the nature of the drugs, not that he did not deliver them.

What was decided in [2026] SGCA 5?

[2026] SGCA 5 (Lingkesvaran Rajendaren v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR) is a Court of Appeal decision from 11 February 2026 addressing Criminal Procedure and Sentencing, specifically stay of execution. The judgment was delivered by Woo Bih Li.

Who were the parties in Lingkesvaran Rajendaren v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ([2026] SGCA 5)?

The applicant in [2026] SGCA 5 was Lingkesvaran Rajendaren, and the respondent was Public Prosecutor. Legal representation included Attorney-General's Chambers. The case was decided on 11 February 2026 in the Court of Appeal.