Sivalingam Suresh v PP: Outraging Modesty with Criminal Force - Conviction Appeal
In Sivalingam Suresh v Public Prosecutor, the High Court of Singapore heard an appeal by Sivalingam Suresh against his conviction in the District Court for using criminal force with intent to outrage modesty. The court, presided over by Chief Justice Yong Pung How, dismissed the appeal on July 12, 2000, finding the victim's evidence unusually compelling and the prosecution's case proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Sivalingam Suresh appeals against his conviction for using criminal force to outrage modesty. The High Court dismisses the appeal, finding the victim's evidence compelling.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sivalingam Suresh | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost | Kesavan Nair |
| Public Prosecutor | Respondent | Government Agency | Conviction Upheld | Won | Jennifer Marie, Tai Wei Shyong |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Yong Pung How | Chief Justice | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Kesavan Nair | MPD Nair & Co |
| Jennifer Marie | Deputy Public Prosecutor |
| Tai Wei Shyong | Deputy Public Prosecutor |
4. Facts
- The victim was a Bangladeshi cleaner.
- The incident occurred in the appellant's flat.
- The appellant pulled the victim into his flat.
- The appellant showed the victim a pornographic video.
- The appellant pointed a knife at the victim.
- The appellant touched the victim's groin over his underwear.
- The victim escaped and reported the incident to his supervisor.
5. Formal Citations
- Sivalingam Suresh v Public Prosecutor, MA 19/2000, [2000] SGHC 139
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Incident occurred at Blk 319 Ang Mo Kio Ave 1. | |
| Police report made after the incident. | |
| Appeal dismissed. |
7. Legal Issues
- Use of criminal force with intent to outrage modesty
- Outcome: The court found that the offence was proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [1997] 1 SLR 46
- Appeal against conviction
- Outcome: The court dismissed the appeal.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
- [1992] 1 SLR 713
- Weight of evidence in sexual offence case
- Outcome: The court found the victim's evidence unusually compelling.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [1997] 1 SLR 46
8. Remedies Sought
- Appeal against conviction
9. Cause of Actions
- Use of criminal force with intent to outrage modesty
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Appeals
- Sexual Offences
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lim Ah Poh v PP | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1992] 1 SLR 713 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that an appellate court will not disturb findings of fact unless they are clearly against the weight of the evidence. |
| Tang Kin Seng v PP | N/A | Yes | [1997] 1 SLR 46 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that it is dangerous to convict on the words of the complainant alone in a sexual offence case unless the evidence is unusually compelling. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| s 354A(1) Penal Code (Cap 224, 1985 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Criminal force
- Outrage modesty
- Sexual offence
- Victim's evidence
- Pornographic videotape
- Contemporaneous complaint
15.2 Keywords
- Criminal force
- Outrage of modesty
- Sexual assault
- Singapore
- High Court
- Appeal
- Conviction
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Sexual Offences
17. Areas of Law
- Criminal Law
- Criminal Procedure
- Evidence