HABEEB ZALEENA D/O PALLIVILAKAM KADER HABEEB MOHAMED v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
Outcome
Appeal dismissedI dismissed the appeal.
Source: [2026] SGHC 99, High Court (General Division), decided 8 May 2026. Read directly from the judgment.
Featured in the weekly digest — week of 4–10 May 2026 →
Key facts
| Court | High Court (General Division) |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judge | Kannan Ramesh |
| Charges / claim | Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure and Sentencing |
| Outcome | Appeal dismissed |
| Counsel | Attorney-General's Chambers, Damodara Ong LLC, Grace Chua Zhu Ern, Isabel Ho Ci Xian, Mohamed Riasudeen, S.M. Sukhmit Singh |
Source: [2026] SGHC 99, High Court (General Division), decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Counsel (6)
Case Significance
Habeeb Zaleena d/o Pallivilakam Kader Habeeb Mohamed v Public Prosecutor [2026] SGHC 99, decided by Justice of the Appeal Division Kannan Ramesh on 8 May 2026, dismissed Habeeb Zaleena's Magistrate's Appeal against her sentence of 11 weeks' imprisonment and five-year driving disqualification for driving without reasonable consideration for other persons under s 65(1)(b) of the Road Traffic Act 1961. The incident occurred on the morning of 30 September 2020 on lane one of Woodlands Road. The appellant, represented by Damodara Ong LLC (S.M. Sukhmit Singh and Isabel Ho Ci Xian), argued that the custodial threshold had not been crossed and sought a fine instead, but JAD Kannan Ramesh upheld the custodial term after hearing the appeal on 20 March 2026.
[2026] SGHC 99 explained
HABEEB ZALEENA D/O PALLIVILAKAM KADER HABEEB MOHAMED v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ([2026] SGHC 99) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (General Division) on 8 May 2026. It is categorised under Criminal Law and Criminal Procedure and Sentencing. 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 [2026] SGHC 99 about?
HABEEB ZALEENA D/O PALLIVILAKAM KADER HABEEB MOHAMED v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ([2026] SGHC 99) is a High Court (General Division) decision from 2026. Its published catchwords are “Criminal Law — Statutory offences — Road Traffic Act” and “Criminal Procedure and Sentencing — Sentencing — Appeals”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.
Which legislation does [2026] SGHC 99 consider?
The judgment refers to Road Traffic Act (Cap 276). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.
What earlier Singapore cases does [2026] SGHC 99 cite?
Among the in-corpus authorities it refers to are [2024] SGHC 262. The complete list of cases cited, and of later cases that cite this decision, is shown on this page.
Summary
Habeeb Zaleena, a motorist who pleaded guilty to driving without reasonable consideration under s 65(1)(b) of the Road Traffic Act, appealed against an 11-week imprisonment term and five-year driving disqualification imposed after she made a swift right turn without checking for oncoming traffic, causing a collision that seriously injured a dispatch rider and sent his motorcycle into further traffic. She argued the custodial threshold had not been crossed and sought a fine instead. The High Court dismissed the appeal, finding the imprisonment term was not manifestly excessive given the serious injuries caused and the applicable sentencing framework.
Was the 11-week imprisonment for driving without reasonable consideration upheld on appeal in [2026] SGHC 99?
Yes. Justice of the Appeal Division Kannan Ramesh dismissed Habeeb Zaleena d/o Pallivilakam Kader Habeeb Mohamed's appeal on 20 March 2026, upholding the 11-week imprisonment and five-year driving disqualification imposed for driving without reasonable consideration on Woodlands Road on 30 September 2020.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (17)
Related cases
Other Singapore judgments involving the same parties or counsel.
Referenced in
Statutes interpreted in this judgment
Sentencing outcomes for this offence
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2026] SGHC 99)