Muhammad Zuhairie v PP: Sentencing of Young Offender, Reformative Training vs. Imprisonment & Caning

Muhammad Zuhairie Adely Bin Zulkifli appealed to the High Court of Singapore against his sentence of 18 months' imprisonment and six strokes of the cane for rioting and causing grievous hurt. The High Court, presided over by Chan Seng Onn J, allowed the appeal, substituting the original sentence with reformative training. The court prioritized rehabilitation due to Zuhairie's youth and potential for reform, despite the seriousness of his offenses.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Appeal Allowed

1.3 Case Type

Criminal

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Appeal against sentence. The court substituted imprisonment and caning with reformative training, prioritizing rehabilitation for a youthful offender.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Public ProsecutorRespondentGovernment AgencyAppeal DismissedLost
Wong Kok Weng of Attorney-General’s Chambers
Ho Lian-Yi of Attorney-General’s Chambers
Muhammad Zuhairie Adely Bin ZulkifliAppellantIndividualAppeal AllowedWon

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Chan Seng OnnJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Wong Kok WengAttorney-General’s Chambers
Ho Lian-YiAttorney-General’s Chambers
Benny TanTrident Law Corporation
Justin TanTrident Law Corporation
Emmanuel LeeTrident Law Corporation

4. Facts

  1. Appellant pleaded guilty to charges under ss 326 and 147 of the Penal Code.
  2. Appellant was 15 years old at the time of the rioting offence and 16 at the time of the grievous hurt offence.
  3. Appellant had no prior criminal record.
  4. Appellant committed grievous hurt by slashing Ahmad Nurthaqif Bin Sahed with a bread knife.
  5. Appellant was part of a group that assaulted Norazrul Bin Mohd Noor.
  6. Appellant had a difficult family background characterized by financial issues and domestic violence.
  7. Appellant demonstrated positive progress in school and at Muhammadiyah Welfare Home.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Muhammad Zuhairie Adely Bin Zulkifli v Public Prosecutor, Magistrate’s Appeal No 9213 of 2015/01, [2016] SGHC 134
  2. Public Prosecutor v Muhammad Zuhairie Adely Bin Zulkifli, , [2015] SGDC 359
  3. Public Prosecutor v Koh Wen Jie Boaz, , [2016] 1 SLR 334
  4. Public Prosecutor v Mohammad Al-Ansari bin Basri, , [2008] 1 SLR(R) 449
  5. Public Prosecutor v Mok Ping Wuen Maurice, , [1998] 3 SLR(R) 439
  6. Public Prosecutor v Justin Heng Zheng Hao, , [2012] SGDC 219
  7. Public Prosecutor v Adith s/o Sarvotham, , [2014] 3 SLR 649
  8. Leon Russel Francis v Public Prosecutor, , [2014] 4 SLR 651
  9. Nur Azilah bte Ithnin v Public Prosecutor, , [2010] 4 SLR 731
  10. Public Prosecutor v Mohammad Fareez Bin Rahmat, , [2010] SGDC 99
  11. Public Prosecutor v Muhammad Bahri Anwar Bin Mohamed Rani, , [2008] SGDC 235
  12. Ng Kwok Fai v Public Prosecutor, , [1996] 1 SLR(R) 193
  13. Public Prosecutor v Kwong Kok Hing, , [2008] 2 SLR(R) 684
  14. Public Prosecutor v Mohamed Noh Hafiz bin Osman, , [2003] 4 SLR(R) 281
  15. Public Prosecutor v Muhammad Nuzaihan bin Kamal Luddin, , [1993] 3 SLR(R) 653
  16. Cheng Thomas v Public Prosecutor, , [2000] 3 SLR(R) 828

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Appellant admitted into the Salvation Army Gracehaven
Interim Care and Protection Order made for Appellant to be admitted into the Singapore Boys’ Home
Appellant ordered to reside at the Muhammadiyah Welfare Home
Appellant enrolled into the Institute of Technical Education College West
Appellant failed to return to Muhammadiyah Welfare Home after school's Industrial Attachment Programme
Appellant and friends assaulted Norazrul Bin Mohd Noor at East Coast Park
Appellant returned to Muhammadiyah Welfare Home
Appellant encountered Norhalizah Bte Abdul Wahab and Ahmad Nurthaqif Bin Sahed at Clarke Quay
Ahmad confronted the Appellant
Appellant claimed Ahmad kicked him on his chest
Appellant sent text messages to Norhalizah
Appellant carried a bread knife to school
Appellant slashed Ahmad Nurthaqif Bin Sahed at ITE College West
Appellant expelled from ITE
Care and Protection Order lapsed
Appellant pleaded guilty to charges under ss 326 and 147 of the Penal Code
District Judge sentenced the Appellant to 18 months’ imprisonment and six strokes of the cane for the grievous hurt offence, and six months’ imprisonment for the rioting offence
Appellant filed Notice of Appeal
District Judge granted a stay of execution of the Appellant’s sentence
Hearing Date
Judgment Date

7. Legal Issues

  1. Appropriateness of Sentence
    • Outcome: The court held that reformative training was the more appropriate sentence, prioritizing rehabilitation over deterrence.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Prioritization of rehabilitation versus deterrence
      • Manifest excessiveness of sentence
    • Related Cases:
      • [2016] 1 SLR 334
      • [2008] 1 SLR(R) 449
      • [1998] 3 SLR(R) 439

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Substitution of imprisonment and caning with reformative training

9. Cause of Actions

  • Grievous Hurt
  • Rioting

10. Practice Areas

  • Criminal Law
  • Appeals

11. Industries

  • No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Public Prosecutor v Muhammad Zuhairie Adely Bin ZulkifliDistrict CourtYes[2015] SGDC 359SingaporeCited as the District Judge's grounds of decision being appealed.
Public Prosecutor v Koh Wen Jie BoazSingapore High CourtYes[2016] 1 SLR 334SingaporeCited for the two-staged approach for sentencing a youthful offender.
Public Prosecutor v Mohammad Al-Ansari bin BasriSingapore High CourtYes[2008] 1 SLR(R) 449SingaporeCited for the two-staged approach for sentencing a youthful offender and factors to consider when balancing rehabilitation and deterrence.
Public Prosecutor v Mok Ping Wuen MauriceSingapore High CourtYes[1998] 3 SLR(R) 439SingaporeCited for the principle that rehabilitation is the dominant sentencing consideration for youthful offenders.
Nur Azilah bte Ithnin v Public ProsecutorSingapore High CourtYes[2010] 4 SLR 731SingaporeCited as an example where rehabilitation remained a dominant sentencing consideration despite the seriousness of the offences.
Public Prosecutor v Adith s/o SarvothamSingapore High CourtYes[2014] 3 SLR 649SingaporeCited for the principle that a case for reformative training would require something less stringent than the standard of 'demonstrably high' for a case of probation in terms of the youthful offender’s capacity or potential for rehabilitation.
Leon Russel Francis v Public ProsecutorSingapore High CourtYes[2014] 4 SLR 651SingaporeCited for the principle that a case for reformative training would require something less stringent than the standard of 'demonstrably high' for a case of probation in terms of the youthful offender’s capacity or potential for rehabilitation.
Ng Kwok Fai v Public ProsecutorSingapore High CourtYes[1996] 1 SLR(R) 193SingaporeCited to support the point that reformative training would substitute both imprisonment and caning.
Public Prosecutor v Kwong Kok HingSingapore High CourtYes[2008] 2 SLR(R) 684SingaporeCited for the circumstances under which an appellate court can interfere in a sentence.
Public Prosecutor v Mohamed Noh Hafiz bin OsmanSingapore High CourtYes[2003] 4 SLR(R) 281SingaporeCited as a case where the offences were sufficiently serious and the actions of the offender were sufficiently outrageous that rehabilitation had to yield to other sentencing considerations.
Public Prosecutor v Muhammad Nuzaihan bin Kamal LuddinSingapore High CourtYes[1993] 3 SLR(R) 653SingaporeCited by the Prosecution as a case where imprisonment was imposed on young offenders.
Cheng Thomas v Public ProsecutorSingapore High CourtYes[2000] 3 SLR(R) 828SingaporeCited as an example where the accused needed strict guidance and enforced reformation for another shot at rehabilitation and hence upheld a sentence of reformative training.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 326Singapore
Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 147Singapore
Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 225BSingapore
Children and Young Persons Act (Cap 38, 2001 Rev Ed) s 49(1)(c)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Reformative training
  • Youthful offender
  • Rehabilitation
  • Deterrence
  • Sentencing
  • Grievous hurt
  • Rioting
  • Care and Protection Order

15.2 Keywords

  • Reformative Training
  • Youthful Offender
  • Sentencing
  • Criminal Law
  • Singapore

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Sentencing95
Criminal Procedure95
Young Offenders95
Criminal Law90
Children and Young Persons Act70

16. Subjects

  • Criminal Law
  • Sentencing Principles
  • Youth Justice