Public Prosecutor v Tay Chin Wah: Arms Offences Act - Discharging Revolver and Intention to Cause Injury
In Public Prosecutor v Tay Chin Wah, the High Court of Singapore convicted Tay Chin Wah on February 26, 2000, for violating s 4(1) of the Arms Offences Act. Tay discharged a revolver at Lee Yang Ping and Soh Keng Ho. The court found that Tay failed to rebut the presumption that he intended to cause personal injury when he fired the shots, leading to his conviction and the imposition of the mandatory death sentence.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Accused convicted.
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Tay Chin Wah was convicted under the Arms Offences Act for discharging a revolver at two individuals. The court found he failed to rebut the presumption of intent to cause injury.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Prosecution | Government Agency | Won | Won | Raymond Fong of Public Prosecutor Chew Siong Tai of Public Prosecutor |
| Tay Chin Wah | Defendant | Individual | Accused convicted | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Kan Ting Chiu | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Raymond Fong | Public Prosecutor |
| Chew Siong Tai | Public Prosecutor |
| Chua Eng Hui | Infinitus Law Corporation |
| Ong Cheong Wei | Rayney Wong & Eric Ng |
4. Facts
- The accused discharged a .38 Smith and Wesson revolver, firing four bullets.
- The bullets were discharged at Lee Yang Ping and Soh Keng Ho.
- The incident occurred at the void deck of Blk 642 Rowell Road, Singapore.
- The accused claimed he fired one shot upwards towards the ceiling.
- Lee was hit by a bullet that went through his handphone and lodged in his buttock.
- The accused admitted to firing two to three shots at Lee and Soh as they fled.
5. Formal Citations
- Public Prosecutor v Tay Chin Wah, CC 7/2001, [2000] SGHC 27
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Accused discharged a revolver at Lee Yang Ping and Soh Keng Ho. | |
| Judgment issued. |
7. Legal Issues
- Whether accused fires shot with intention to cause injury
- Outcome: The court found that the accused failed to rebut the presumption that he intended to cause personal injury when he fired the shots.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Conviction under the Arms Offences Act
9. Cause of Actions
- Violation of s 4(1) of the Arms Offences Act
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Law
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No cited cases | |||||
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Arms Offences Act (Cap 14) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Arms Offences Act
- Revolver
- Discharge of bullets
- Intention to cause injury
- Presumption
- Rebuttal
15.2 Keywords
- Arms Offences Act
- Criminal Law
- Singapore
- Revolver
- Tay Chin Wah
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Arms Offences | 98 |
| Criminal Law | 95 |
| Offences | 90 |
| Evidence Law | 60 |
| Evidence | 50 |
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Arms Offences