Public Prosecutor v. Haryani Binte Juraimi
Outcome
Sentence imposed“The sentences for the MDR, CMA and MOA Charges shall run consecutively, with the imprisonment term for the CDSA Charge running concurrently, resulting in an aggregate imprisonment term of 33 months’ two weeks’ imprisonment, with a disgorgement fine of $500 (in default three days’ imprisonment).”
Source: [2026] SGDC 163, District Court, decided 13 May 2026. Read directly from the judgment.
Key facts
| Court | District Court |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judge | Justin Yeo |
| Charges / claim | Criminal Procedure and Sentencing |
| Outcome | Sentence imposed |
| Sentence / award | $500 |
| Counsel | Attorney-General's Chambers, M/s Kannan SG, Gogulakannan s/o Suppayya, Leong Kit Yu, Santhiya Kulasekaran |
Source: [2026] SGDC 163, District Court, decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Counsel (5)
Parties (2)
Case Significance
Public Prosecutor v Haryani Binte Juraimi [2026] SGDC 163 was decided by District Judge Justin Yeo in the District Court on 13 May 2026. The accused, an inmate of Institution S2 of Selarang Park Community Supervision Centre, failed to return after being granted leave and later committed offences while unlawfully at large. She pleaded guilty to four charges, with three charges taken into consideration. The charges concerned failing to return to the institution, disclosing her Singpass credentials, opening a Maybank corporate account that another person could operate, and providing 105 SIM cards to a person called Sher. The Court imposed eight months' imprisonment for the MDR charge, seven months' two weeks' for the CMA charge, 12 months' for the CDSA charge and 18 months' for the MOA charge. The MDR, CMA and MOA sentences run consecutively, giving 33 months' two weeks' imprisonment and a disgorgement fine of $500.
Summary
The District Court sentenced Haryani Binte Juraimi, a former inmate of a community supervision centre who absconded after being granted leave, on four proceeded charges. They were under the Misuse of Drugs (Approved Institutions) Regulations, the Computer Misuse Act, the Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act and the Miscellaneous Offences (Public Order and Nuisance) Act, three further charges being taken into consideration. The Court imposed a global sentence of 33 months' two weeks' imprisonment and a disgorgement fine of $500.
What was Public Prosecutor v Haryani Binte Juraimi about ([2026] SGDC 163)?
The accused, an inmate who absconded while on leave from a community supervision centre, pleaded guilty to four charges including disclosing her Singpass credentials, enabling use of a Maybank account and providing 105 SIM cards to a person called Sher for scams.
What global sentence did the court impose in [2026] SGDC 163?
The District Court imposed a global sentence of 33 months' two weeks' imprisonment, with a disgorgement fine of $500 in default three days' imprisonment. The sentences for the MDR, CMA and MOA charges run consecutively, and the CDSA sentence runs concurrently.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (9)
Related cases
Other Singapore judgments on the same subject, most closely matched first.
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2026] SGDC 163)