Idya Nurhazlyn v PP: False Statements & Cheating under Passports Act & Penal Code
Idya Nurhazlyn bte Ahmad Khir and Zunaidi bin Jaafar appealed to the High Court of Singapore against the District Court's decision in Public Prosecutor v Idya Nurhazlyn binte Ahmad Khir and another. Idya pleaded guilty to two charges of making false statements under s 39(1) of the Passports Act and two charges of cheating under s 417 of the Penal Code. Zunaidi pleaded guilty to one charge of making a false statement under s 39(1) of the Passports Act. The High Court allowed the appeal in part, reducing Idya's aggregate sentence to 4½ months' imprisonment and Zunaidi's sentence to 3 weeks' imprisonment.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Appeal Allowed in Part
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Idya Nurhazlyn and Zunaidi appealed against sentences for false statements under the Passports Act and cheating under the Penal Code. The High Court reduced their sentences.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Respondent | Government Agency | Partial Loss | Partial | Jiang Ke-Yue of Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Idya Nurhazlyn bte Ahmad Khir | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Allowed in Part | Partial | |
| Zunaidi bin Jaafar | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Allowed in Part | Partial |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Sundaresh Menon | Chief Justice | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Jiang Ke-Yue | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Derek Kang Yu Hsien | Rodyk & Davidson LLP |
4. Facts
- Idya and Zunaidi were staying at the Lotus Desaru Hotel in Malaysia and could not pay the hotel bill.
- The hotel retained the passports of Idya, Zunaidi, and their family members as security.
- Idya lodged a police report stating that she and her family members had lost their passports.
- Idya and Zunaidi applied for documents of identity at the Singapore High Commission in Kuala Lumpur.
- Idya cheated Norizah of $1,800 by offering to purchase Apple products at a low price.
- Idya cheated ITIS Pte Ltd of $10,509 worth of Sony products by issuing a dishonoured cheque.
- Idya made full restitution to Norizah and ITIS Pte Ltd.
5. Formal Citations
- Idya Nurhazlyn bte Ahmad Khir v Public Prosecutor and another appeal, Magistrate's Appeal No 134 of 2013 and Magistrate's Appeal No 135 of 2013, [2013] SGHC 238
- Public Prosecutor v Idya Nurhazlyn binte Ahmad Khir and another, , [2013] SGDC 217
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Appellants stayed at the Lotus Desaru Hotel in Malaysia. | |
| Idya lodged a police report stating that she and her family members had lost their passports. | |
| Idya and her family applied for documents of identity at the Singapore High Commission in Kuala Lumpur. | |
| Zunaidi applied for a document of identity at the Singapore High Commission. | |
| Idya offered to purchase Apple products at a low price from a supplier for her relatives. | |
| Norizah transferred $1,800 to Idya’s bank account. | |
| A police report was made regarding the cheating of Norizah. | |
| Idya ordered $10,509 worth of Sony products from ITIS Pte Ltd. | |
| A police report was made regarding the cheating of ITIS Pte Ltd. | |
| Judgment reserved. |
7. Legal Issues
- False Statement
- Outcome: The High Court reduced the sentence for the false statement offences.
- Category: Substantive
- Cheating
- Outcome: The High Court reduced the sentence for one of the cheating offences but upheld the sentence for the other.
- Category: Substantive
- Sentencing
- Outcome: The High Court reviewed the sentences imposed by the District Judge and reduced some of them.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
- [2010] 1 SLR 707
- [2002] 1 SLR(R) 182
- [1993] 2 SLR(R) 406
8. Remedies Sought
- Appeal against sentence
9. Cause of Actions
- Making False Statement
- Cheating
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Law
- Appeals
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Luong Thi Trang Hoang Kathleen v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2010] 1 SLR 707 | Singapore | Cited for sentencing approach for analogous offences. |
| Abu Syeed Chowdhury v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2002] 1 SLR(R) 182 | Singapore | Cited for analytical framework for assessing culpability of an offender for false statement offences. |
| Lai Oei Mui Jenny v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [1993] 2 SLR(R) 406 | Singapore | Cited for sentencing approach for analogous offences. |
| Public Prosecutor v Steve Segar Selva | District Court | Yes | Public Prosecutor v Steve Segar Selva | Singapore | Cited as a precedent directly on point for false statement offence under s 39(1) of the Passports Act. |
| Lim Choon Kang v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [1993] 3 SLR(R) 254 | Singapore | Cited as an example where fines could be imposed instead of custodial sentences where the offence involved misleading share applications. |
| Soong Hee Sin v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2001] 1 SLR(R) 475 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that credit will not be given for restitution made on the advice of counsel with a calculated purposefulness. |
| Public Prosecutor v Fernando Payagala Waduge Malitha Kumar | High Court | Yes | [2007] 2 SLR(R) 334 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that where the offence entails the misuse of a financial instrument or facility which threatens the conduct of legitimate commerce, the need for general deterrence is likely to take centre stage. |
| Maideen Pillai v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [1995] 3 SLR(R) 706 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the false statement offences were part of the same transaction and the sentences imposed in respect of these offences should therefore be concurrent rather than consecutive. |
| Public Prosecutor v Hirris anak Martin and another | High Court | Yes | [2010] 2 SLR 976 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that both cheating offences are wholly separate and consecutive sentences are prima facie appropriate. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Passports Act (Cap 220, 2008 Rev Ed) s 39(1) | Singapore |
| Passports Act s 16 | Singapore |
| Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 417 | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) s 307 | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- False Statement
- Cheating
- Passports Act
- Penal Code
- Document of Identity
- Restitution
- Sentencing
- Manifestly Excessive
15.2 Keywords
- False Statement
- Cheating
- Passports Act
- Penal Code
- Singapore
- Criminal Appeal
- Sentencing
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Passport Act | 85 |
| Criminal Law | 75 |
| Cheating | 70 |
| Sentencing | 65 |
| Criminal Procedure | 60 |
| Evidence | 30 |
| Contract Law | 25 |
| Constitutional Law | 10 |
| Torts | 10 |
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Sentencing
- Immigration Law