PP v Hirris anak Martin: Enhanced Sentence for Robbery with Grievous Hurt
In Public Prosecutor v Hirris anak Martin and another, the Court of Appeal of Singapore heard an appeal by the prosecution against the sentences imposed on Hirris anak Martin and James Anak Anggang for robbery with grievous hurt. The High Court had sentenced them to ten years’ imprisonment and 24 strokes of the cane for the common charge, and James Anak Anggang to five years’ imprisonment and 12 strokes of the cane for a separate charge, with the sentences to run concurrently. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, increasing the sentence for the common charge to 15 years’ imprisonment and 24 strokes of the cane, and ordering the sentences for James Anak Anggang to run consecutively.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Court of Appeal1.2 Outcome
Appeal Allowed
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Appeal to increase sentences for robbery with grievous hurt. The court enhanced the sentences, emphasizing the need to deter gratuitous violence.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Appellant | Government Agency | Appeal Allowed | Won | Amarjit Singh of Attorney-General’s Chambers Sharon Lim of Attorney-General’s Chambers Lee Sing Lit of Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Hirris anak Martin | Respondent | Individual | Sentence Increased | Lost | |
| James Anak Anggang | Respondent | Individual | Sentence Increased and to Run Consecutively | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Chan Sek Keong | Chief Justice | Yes |
| V K Rajah | Justice of the Court of Appeal | No |
| Tay Yong Kwang | Judge | No |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Amarjit Singh | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Sharon Lim | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Lee Sing Lit | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
4. Facts
- Respondents and Ah Choi agreed to rob someone to get money for liquor.
- They armed themselves with a metal rod.
- They spotted the deceased, Abu Saleh Taser Uddin Ahmed, lying in an open field.
- Ah Choi struck the deceased on the head with the metal rod.
- The respondents punched and kicked the deceased until he was unconscious.
- Ah Choi stole the deceased's wallet containing $50.00, an EZ-Link card, and a POSB ATM card.
- The deceased died from his injuries.
- The second respondent was also involved in an earlier robbery where he punched and kicked the victim and stole his hand phone.
5. Formal Citations
- Public Prosecutor v Hirris anak Martin and another, , [2010] SGCA 8
- Public Prosecutor v Hirris anak Martin and another, Criminal Appeal No 10 of 2009, Criminal Appeal No 10 of 2009
- Public Prosecutor v Hirris anak Martin and another, Criminal Case No 19 of 2009, Criminal Case No 19 of 2009
- Public Prosecutor v Hirris Anak Martin and Another, , [2009] SGHC 132
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Second respondent committed robbery against Molfot Bepari Moslem Bepari. | |
| Respondents and Ah Choi agreed to rob someone. | |
| Respondents and Ah Choi robbed Abu Saleh Taser Uddin Ahmed. | |
| Abu Saleh Taser Uddin Ahmed was found unconscious. | |
| Abu Saleh Taser Uddin Ahmed died from his injuries. | |
| First and second respondents were arrested by the police. | |
| Criminal Case No 19 of 2009 | |
| Court of Appeal allowed the appeal. |
7. Legal Issues
- Adequacy of Sentence
- Outcome: The court held that the original sentence was manifestly inadequate and increased the sentence.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Departure from sentencing precedents
- Gratuitous violence
- Related Cases:
- [1996] 3 SLR(R) 268
- [1999] 1 SLR(R) 377
- [2004] SGHC 172
- [2005] 2 SLR(R) 130
- [2008] 4 SLR(R) 500
- Concurrent vs Consecutive Sentences
- Outcome: The court held that the imprisonment sentences against the second respondent should run consecutively.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- One-transaction rule
- Totality principle
- Related Cases:
- [1995] 3 SLR(R) 706
- [2007] 2 SLR(R) 814
- [2006] 3 SLR(R) 677
8. Remedies Sought
- Increased Sentence
9. Cause of Actions
- Robbery with Grievous Hurt
- Robbery with Hurt
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Law
- Appeals
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor v Abdul Naser bin Amer Hamsah | High Court | No | [1996] 3 SLR(R) 268 | Singapore | Cited as a sentencing precedent for robbery cases involving death. |
| Roslan bin Abdul Rahman v Public Prosecutor | High Court | No | [1999] 1 SLR(R) 377 | Singapore | Cited as a sentencing precedent for robbery cases involving death, even when the death was accidental. |
| Public Prosecutor v Somrak Senkham and another | High Court | No | [2004] SGHC 172 | Singapore | Cited as a sentencing precedent for robbery cases involving death, but distinguished as an anomaly. |
| Public Prosecutor v Lim Poh Lye and another | High Court | No | [2005] 2 SLR(R) 130 | Singapore | Cited as a sentencing precedent for robbery cases involving death. |
| Public Prosecutor v UI | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2008] 4 SLR(R) 500 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that lower courts should respect sentencing precedents set by higher courts. |
| Viswanathan Ramachandran v Public Prosecutor | High Court | No | [2003] 3 SLR(R) 435 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that each case turns on its own facts. |
| Tan Kay Beng v Public Prosecutor | High Court | No | [2006] 4 SLR(R) 10 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that each case turns on its own facts. |
| Public Prosecutor v Loqmanul Hakim bin Buang | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2007] 4 SLR(R) 753 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the court's reasoning accords legitimacy to the sentence passed. |
| Public Prosecutor v Raffi Bin Jelan and Another | High Court | Yes | [2004] SGHC 120 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that gratuitous violence warrants a deterrent sentence. |
| Public Prosecutor v Leong Soon Kheong | High Court | Yes | [2009] 4 SLR(R) 63 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that gratuitous violence warrants a deterrent sentence. |
| Public Prosecutor v Law Aik Meng | High Court | Yes | [2007] 2 SLR(R) 814 | Singapore | Cited for the rationale behind deterrent sentences for crimes causing public disquiet and involving gratuitous violence. |
| Maideen Pillai v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [1995] 3 SLR(R) 706 | Singapore | Cited for the totality principle in sentencing. |
| Public Prosecutor v McCrea Michael | High Court | No | [2006] 3 SLR(R) 677 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the totality principle can justify disparity in sentences between co-offenders. |
| Angliss Singapore Pte Ltd v PP | High Court | Yes | [2006] 4 SLR(R) 653 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the court's reasoning accords legitimacy to the sentence passed. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Penal Code (Cap 224, 1985 Rev Ed) s 394 | Singapore |
| Penal Code (Cap 224, 1985 Rev Ed) s 397 | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Robbery
- Grievous Hurt
- Sentencing Precedents
- Gratuitous Violence
- Concurrent Sentences
- Consecutive Sentences
- Totality Principle
15.2 Keywords
- Robbery
- Grievous Hurt
- Sentencing
- Criminal Law
- Singapore
- Appeal
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Criminal Law | 95 |
| Murder | 60 |
| Criminal Procedure | 50 |
| Personal Injury | 30 |
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Sentencing
- Robbery