Public Prosecutor v Kelvin Sunderesan s/o Retchagadas
Outcome
Sentence imposed“I sentenced the accused to 10 months’ imprisonment and three strokes of the cane.”
Source: [2026] SGMC 110, Magistrate Court, decided 14 September 2026. Read directly from the judgment.
Key facts
| Court | Magistrate Court |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judge | Koh Jiaying |
| Charges / claim | Criminal Law |
| Outcome | Sentence imposed |
| Sentence / award | 10 months’ imprisonment |
| Counsel | Attorney-General's Chambers, Chong Kee En, Erfendi Dhahlan, James Chew |
Source: [2026] SGMC 110, Magistrate Court, decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Counsel (4)
Parties (2)
Case Significance
Public Prosecutor v Kelvin Sunderesan s/o Retchagadas [2026] SGMC 110 was decided in the Magistrate's Court by District Judge Koh Jiaying on 14 September 2026. The accused claimed trial to one charge under s 3 of the Vandalism Act 1966 for peeling off the padding cover of the floor of Regional Lock-up Cell No. 26P at 391 New Bridge Road on 11 July 2024. He argued that the cell was not public property, that he was hallucinating a centipede from alcohol withdrawal, and that the harm was slight under s 95 of the Penal Code 1871. The court dismissed his application to join a separate disorderly behaviour charge, found that the prosecution had proved the charge beyond a reasonable doubt and convicted him. It imposed 10 months' imprisonment and three strokes of the cane, backdated to 8 August 2025, and rejected any adjustment for the earlier sentence.
[2026] SGMC 110 explained
Public Prosecutor v Kelvin Sunderesan s/o Retchagadas ([2026] SGMC 110) is a Singapore judgment decided by the Magistrate Court on 14 September 2026. It is categorised under 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 [2026] SGMC 110 about?
Public Prosecutor v Kelvin Sunderesan s/o Retchagadas ([2026] SGMC 110) is a Magistrate Court decision from 2026. Its published catchwords are “Criminal Law - Statutory Offences - Vandalism Act 1966 - Criminal Procedure and Sentencing - Sentencing”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.
Which legislation does [2026] SGMC 110 consider?
The judgment refers to Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68), Penal Code (Cap 224), Protection from Harassment Act (Cap 256A), and Vandalism Act. The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.
Summary
The Magistrate's Court convicted Kelvin Sunderesan s/o Retchagadas, who claimed trial, of one charge under s 3 of the Vandalism Act 1966 for peeling off the padding cover of the floor in a padded lock-up cell at the Police Cantonment Complex on 11 July 2024. The court rejected his defences, including that he was hallucinating a centipede, and that the harm was too slight under s 95 of the Penal Code 1871. It sentenced him to 10 months' imprisonment and three strokes of the cane, backdated to 8 August 2025.
What sentence was imposed in Public Prosecutor v Kelvin Sunderesan s/o Retchagadas [2026] SGMC 110?
District Judge Koh Jiaying sentenced the accused to 10 months' imprisonment and three strokes of the cane for vandalism under s 3 of the Vandalism Act 1966, with the sentence backdated to 8 August 2025.
What defences did the accused raise to the vandalism charge in [2026] SGMC 110?
The accused argued that the cell was not public property, that he was of unsound mind and hallucinating a centipede, and that the harm was too slight under s 95 of the Penal Code. The court rejected these and convicted him.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (12)
Related cases
Other Singapore judgments involving the same parties or counsel.
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2026] SGMC 110)