Public Prosecutor v Yang Yin: Revision of Bail Order for Falsification of Accounts
In Public Prosecutor v Yang Yin, the High Court of Singapore, presided over by Sundaresh Menon CJ on 8 January 2015, heard an application by the Public Prosecutor to revise the District Judge's order granting bail to Yang Yin, who was charged with 11 counts of falsification of accounts. The High Court allowed the application, revoking the bail order, citing concerns about the respondent's flight risk and the source of the bail funds.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Application allowed and the order granting bail was revoked.
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
The High Court revised a District Judge's order, revoking bail for Yang Yin, who faced charges of falsifying accounts. The court cited concerns about flight risk and the source of bail funds.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Applicant | Government Agency | Application Allowed | Won | Tan Ken Hwee, Ang Feng Qian, Nicholas Tan, Norman Yew, Kenneth Chin |
| Yang Yin | Respondent | Individual | Bail Revoked | Lost | Wee Pan Lee |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Sundaresh Menon | Chief Justice | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Tan Ken Hwee | Attorney-General's Chambers |
| Ang Feng Qian | Attorney-General's Chambers |
| Nicholas Tan | Attorney-General's Chambers |
| Norman Yew | Attorney-General's Chambers |
| Kenneth Chin | Attorney-General's Chambers |
| Wee Pan Lee | Wee, Tay & Lim LLP |
4. Facts
- The respondent was charged with 11 counts of falsification of accounts under s 477A of the Penal Code.
- The Prosecution tendered 320 fresh charges under s 477A against the respondent.
- The respondent is a foreign national with family members abroad.
- A sum of approximately $500,000 had been transferred from the respondent’s Singapore bank account to Mdm Chung’s account.
- A second transfer of an almost identical amount was then made on the same day from Mdm Chung’s account to an account in China that apparently belonged to the respondent’s father.
- The bail money would not be that of the Singaporean sureties but would have been channelled to the sureties from the respondent’s parents who resided in China.
- The respondent admitted that he had created fictitious receipts to show that payments had been made to his company.
5. Formal Citations
- Public Prosecutor v Yang Yin, , [2015] SGHC 3
- Public Prosecutor v Yang Yin, Criminal Revision No 18 of 2014, Criminal Revision No 18 of 2014
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| The respondent was charged in the State Courts with 11 counts of falsification of accounts. | |
| The Prosecution tendered 320 fresh charges against the respondent. | |
| The District Judge granted bail to the respondent. | |
| The parties were heard. | |
| The application was allowed and the order granting bail was revoked. | |
| Detailed grounds for the decision were set out. |
7. Legal Issues
- Revision of Bail Order
- Outcome: The High Court allowed the application for revision and revoked the bail order.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Misapplication of burden of proof
- Failure to appreciate the absence of the pull of bail
- Related Cases:
- [1987] SLR(R) 525
- [2014] SGHC 228
- Burden of Proof for Bail
- Outcome: The court held that the onus was on the respondent to show that bail should be extended to him.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
- [2014] 1 SLR 547
- [2005] 4 SLR(R) 409
- Considerations for Granting Bail
- Outcome: The court outlined the non-exhaustive considerations that may be taken into account when determining whether to grant bail.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [1948] MLJ 114
- [2014] 3 SLR 649
- Source of Bail Monies
- Outcome: The court emphasized the importance of considering the source of funds being advanced for bail and whether the sureties are suitably incentivized.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [2003] 1 SLR(R) 517
- (1976) 120 SJ 214
- (1885) 15 QBD 561
- [1900] 1 Ch 37
- [1910] 1 KB 369
8. Remedies Sought
- Revision of Bail Order
9. Cause of Actions
- Falsification of Accounts
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Law
- Criminal Revision
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mohamed Razip and others v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1987] SLR(R) 525 | Singapore | Cited to support the conclusion that a bail order was not a judgment, sentence or order within the meaning of the provision. |
| Gng Eng Hwoo v Regina | N/A | No | [1954] MLJ 256 | N/A | Cited for the conclusion that an order in relation to the ownership of a boat lacked the quality of finality necessary to come within the meaning of the word “order”. |
| Public Prosecutor v Sollihin bin Anhar | High Court | Yes | [2014] SGHC 228 | Singapore | Cited Mohamed Razip and held that a decision on bail was interlocutory in nature and would generally be regarded as a non-appealable order. |
| Public Prosecutor v Ram Ghanshamdas Mahtani and another action | N/A | Yes | [2003] 1 SLR(R) 517 | Singapore | Cited to support the observations of Lord Widgery CJ in R v Southhampton Justices, ex parte Corker regarding the 'real pull of bail'. |
| R v Southhampton Justices, ex parte Corker | N/A | Yes | (1976) 120 SJ 214 | N/A | Cited for the principle that the 'real pull of bail' is that it may cause the offender to attend his trial rather than subject his nearest and dearest who has gone surety for him to undue pain and discomfort. |
| Herman v Jeuchner | English Court of Appeal | Yes | (1885) 15 QBD 561 | England | Cited for the principle that a contract is illegal if it takes away the protection which the law affords for securing the good behaviour of the plaintiff. |
| Consolidated Exploration and Finance Co v Musgrave | N/A | Yes | [1900] 1 Ch 37 | N/A | Cited in support of its submission that an agreement to indemnify a surety for bail liabilities would be contrary to public policy. |
| Rex v Porter | English Court of Criminal Appeal | Yes | [1910] 1 KB 369 | England | Cited in support of its submission that an agreement to indemnify a surety for bail liabilities would be contrary to public policy. |
| Yunani bin Abdul Hamid v Public Prosecutor | N/A | Yes | [2008] 3 SLR(R) 383 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the threshold is that of “serious injustice” and that reversionary power should be exercised “sparingly”. |
| Ang Poh Chuan v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [1995] 3 SLR(R) 929 | Singapore | Cited for the explanation of what would constitute such serious injustice. |
| Knight Glenn Jeyasingam v Public Prosecutor | N/A | Yes | [1998] 3 SLR(R) 196 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the irregularity or otherwise noted from the record of proceedings must have resulted in grave and serious injustice. |
| Fatimah bte Kumin Lim v Attorney-General | N/A | Yes | [2014] 1 SLR 547 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that since the respondent was charged with non-bailable offences under s 477A of the Penal Code, bail was not available to the respondent as of right although the court might in its discretion decide to offer bail. |
| S Selvamsylvester v Public Prosecutor | N/A | Yes | [2005] 4 SLR(R) 409 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the onus was on him to show that bail should nonetheless be extended to him. |
| Public Prosecutor v Wee Swee Siang | N/A | Yes | [1948] MLJ 114 | N/A | Cited for the non-exhaustive considerations that may be taken into account by a court which has to determine whether to grant bail. |
| Public Prosecutor v Adith s/o Sarvotham | N/A | Yes | [2014] 3 SLR 649 | Singapore | Cited to note that some of the considerations overlap with the considerations relevant in the context of a bail application pending appeal. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Criminal Procedure Code | Singapore |
| s 400 of the Criminal Procedure Code | Singapore |
| s 374 of the Criminal Procedure Code | Singapore |
| s 380 of the Criminal Procedure Code | Singapore |
| s 377 of the Criminal Procedure Code | Singapore |
| s 97 of the Criminal Procedure Code | Singapore |
| Supreme Court of Judicature Act | Singapore |
| s 477A of the Penal Code | Singapore |
| s 92 of the Criminal Procedure Code | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Bail
- Falsification of Accounts
- Criminal Revision
- Flight Risk
- Surety
- Burden of Proof
- Pull of Bail
- Non-bailable Offence
15.2 Keywords
- Bail
- Criminal Revision
- Falsification of Accounts
- Singapore
- High Court
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Penal Code
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Criminal Procedure
- Bail
- Revision
17. Areas of Law
- Criminal Procedure
- Falsification of Accounts
- Bail