Public Prosecutor v Mohd Raffiq: Murder Conviction Based on Retracted Confession

In Public Prosecutor v Mohd Raffiq Bin Mohd Aslam, the High Court of Singapore convicted Mohd Raffiq of murder for the death of Saratha Sangeo. The primary legal issue was whether the accused could be convicted based on a retracted confession. The court, after reviewing the evidence and considering the accused's retracted statements, found him guilty and sentenced him to death.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Accused found guilty of murder and sentenced to death.

1.3 Case Type

Criminal

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Mohd Raffiq was convicted of murder based on his retracted confession. The court found his initial statements to be true despite his later denial.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Public ProsecutorProsecutionGovernment AgencyJudgment for ProsecutionWon
Terence Tay of Deputy Public Prosecutors
Imran Abdul Hamid of Deputy Public Prosecutors
Woo Ka Wai of Deputy Public Prosecutors
Mohd Raffiq Bin Mohd AslamDefendantIndividualConvicted of MurderLost

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
MPH RubinJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Terence TayDeputy Public Prosecutors
Imran Abdul HamidDeputy Public Prosecutors
Woo Ka WaiDeputy Public Prosecutors
Goh Teck WeeGoh Chang JP and Wong
David RasifDavid Rasif and Partners

4. Facts

  1. The accused was charged with the murder of his former colleague, Saratha Sangeo.
  2. The victim was found dead in her flat with severe head injuries.
  3. The accused pawned the victim's jewellery on the morning of her death.
  4. The accused initially confessed to attacking the victim in multiple police statements.
  5. The accused later retracted his confession, claiming he was covering for Jaganathan.
  6. Jaganathan, the victim's husband, was found injured and initially a suspect.
  7. The court found the accused's initial confessions to be true despite the retraction.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Public Prosecutor v Mohd Raffiq Bin Mohd Aslam, CC 22/2003, [2004] SGHC 57

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Accused began working at Systematic Laundry Enterprise Pte Ltd.
Accused left Systematic Laundry Enterprise Pte Ltd.
Saratha Sangeo died.
Accused pawned jewellery at Ban Hin Pawnshop.
Accused assaulted Jaganathan at Yishun Industrial Park A.
Victim's body discovered in her flat.
Autopsy of the victim conducted.
Police investigation at Ban Hin Pawnshop Pte Ltd.
Accused arrested at Hotel 81 Classic.
Judgment delivered.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Retracted Confession
    • Outcome: The court held that the accused could be convicted on the strength of his retracted confession because the court was satisfied that the confession was true.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Admissibility of retracted confession
      • Truthfulness of retracted confession
    • Related Cases:
      • (1947) 13 MLJ 90
      • [1965–1968] SLR 128
      • [1972–1974] SLR 232
  2. Murder
    • Outcome: The court found the accused guilty of murder.
    • Category: Substantive

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Conviction
  2. Death penalty

9. Cause of Actions

  • Murder

10. Practice Areas

  • Criminal Law
  • Homicide

11. Industries

  • No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Yap Sow Keong v PPCourt of AppealYes(1947) 13 MLJ 90MalaysiaCited for the principle that an accused can be convicted on the strength of a retracted confession if the court is satisfied that the confession was true.
Osman v PPFederal CourtYes[1965–1968] SLR 128SingaporeRe-affirmed the principle that an accused can be convicted on the strength of a retracted confession if the court is satisfied that the confession was true.
Ismail bin UK Abdul Rahman v PPCourt of Criminal AppealYes[1972–1974] SLR 232SingaporeRe-stated the principle that an accused can be convicted on the strength of a retracted confession if the court is satisfied that the confession was true, and added that there was no requirement of any corroborative evidence to support the confession.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Penal Code (Cap 224, 1985 Rev Ed) ss 300Singapore
Penal Code (Cap 224, 1985 Rev Ed) ss 302Singapore
Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 1985 Rev Ed)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Retracted confession
  • Voluntary statement
  • Thali
  • Post-traumatic amnesia
  • Scene of crime
  • Financial troubles
  • Matrimonial discord

15.2 Keywords

  • Murder
  • Confession
  • Retraction
  • Evidence
  • Singapore
  • Criminal Law

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Murder95
Criminal Law90
Penal Code85
Offences80
Evidence Law70
Evidence70
Confessions65
Criminal Procedure60

16. Subjects

  • Criminal Law
  • Evidence
  • Murder
  • Confessions