Public Prosecutor v BPK: Attempted Murder Sentencing - Singapore High Court
In Public Prosecutor v BPK, the High Court of Singapore sentenced BPK to 14 years' imprisonment and six strokes of the cane for attempted murder. The court, presided over by Justice Woo Bih Li, considered the paramount sentencing considerations to be general deterrence and retribution, given the viciousness of the attack and the need to send a strong message against violence. The Prosecution urged the Court to impose a sentence of at least 14 years’ imprisonment and six strokes of the cane, while the Defence submitted that the appropriate sentence was no more than eight years’ imprisonment with no caning, or alternatively, not more than two strokes of the cane.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Accused sentenced to 14 years’ imprisonment and six strokes of the cane.
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
BPK was convicted of attempted murder and sentenced to 14 years' imprisonment and six strokes of the cane. The High Court considered general deterrence and retribution.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Prosecution | Government Agency | Successful Prosecution | Won | Bhajanvir Singh of Attorney-General’s Chambers Lim Ai Juan Daphne of Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| BPK | Defendant | Individual | Conviction and Sentence | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Woo Bih Li | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Bhajanvir Singh | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Lim Ai Juan Daphne | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Rengarajoo s/o Rengasamy Balasamy | B Rengarajoo & Associates |
| Tan Heng Khim | Apex Law LLP |
4. Facts
- The Accused inflicted multiple stab and slash wounds to the Victim on her head, neck, chest, abdomen, back and arms with a knife.
- The assault took place at the void deck of a block of flats.
- The Victim suffered extensive injuries, some of which were life-threatening and/or permanent.
- The Accused had taken a knife from his kitchen and hidden it in his sock before looking for the Victim.
- The Accused harboured an intention to kill the Victim at the time of the offence.
- Members of the public were alarmed and disturbed by the assault, resulting in 15 police reports.
5. Formal Citations
- Public Prosecutor v BPK, Criminal Case No 10 of 2017, [2018] SGHC 135
- Public Prosecutor v BPK, , [2018] SGHC 34
- Public Prosecutor v Ravindran Annamalai, , [2013] SGHC 77
- Public Prosecutor v Seng Inn Thye, , [2003] SGHC 88
- Zhao Zhipeng v Public Prosecutor, , [2008] 4 SLR(R) 879
- Public Prosecutor v Leong Soon Kheong, , [2009] 4 SLR(R) 63
- Ng Kean Meng Terence v Public Prosecutor, , [2017] 2 SLR 449
- Logachev Vladislav v Public Prosecutor, , [2018] SGHC 12
- Public Prosecutor v Ong Chee Heng, , [2017] 5 SLR 876
- Tan Kay Beng v Public Prosecutor, , [2006] 4 SLR(R) 10
- Public Prosecutor v Muhamad Hasik bin Sahar, , [2002] 1 SLR(R) 1069
- Public Prosecutor v BDB, , [2018] 1 SLR 127
- Keeping Mark John v Public Prosecutor, , [2017] 5 SLR 627
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Multiple stab and slash wounds inflicted on the Victim | |
| Accused remanded | |
| Trial Day 1 | |
| Trial Day 5 | |
| Criminal Case No 10 of 2017 | |
| Accused convicted of attempted murder | |
| Accused sentenced to 14 years’ imprisonment and six strokes of the cane | |
| Grounds of Decision issued |
7. Legal Issues
- Appropriate Sentence for Attempted Murder
- Outcome: The court determined that a sentence of 14 years’ imprisonment and six strokes of the cane was appropriate, considering general deterrence, retribution, and the aggravating factors of the case.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [2013] SGHC 77
- [2003] SGHC 88
8. Remedies Sought
- Imprisonment
- Caning
9. Cause of Actions
- Attempted Murder
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Law
- Sentencing
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor v BPK | High Court | Yes | [2018] SGHC 34 | Singapore | Sets out the background to the offence, issues relating to the Accused’s capacity to form mens rea at the material time, his factual intention at that time, and the partial defence of provocation. |
| Public Prosecutor v Ravindran Annamalai | High Court | Yes | [2013] SGHC 77 | Singapore | Cited by the Prosecution as a precedent for sentencing in attempted murder cases. Distinguished from the present case due to the greater extent and severity of injuries and the element of public disquiet. |
| Public Prosecutor v Seng Inn Thye | High Court | Yes | [2003] SGHC 88 | Singapore | Cited by the Defence as an analogous precedent. Distinguished due to statutory amendments to s 307 of the Penal Code and the less serious facts of the case. |
| Zhao Zhipeng v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2008] 4 SLR(R) 879 | Singapore | Cited regarding the consideration of repatriation at the end of a sentence and its impact on specific deterrence. |
| Public Prosecutor v Leong Soon Kheong | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2009] 4 SLR(R) 63 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that no one is entitled to exact violence in order to seek redress for grievances. |
| Ng Kean Meng Terence v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2017] 2 SLR 449 | Singapore | Cited for the framework of considering offence-specific and offender-specific factors in sentencing. |
| Logachev Vladislav v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2018] SGHC 12 | Singapore | Cited for the framework of considering offence-specific and offender-specific factors in sentencing. |
| Public Prosecutor v Ong Chee Heng | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2017] 5 SLR 876 | Singapore | Cited regarding the aggravating factor of committing an offence in a public place causing public fear and alarm. |
| Tan Kay Beng v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2006] 4 SLR(R) 10 | Singapore | Cited regarding the aggravating factor of committing an offence in a public place causing public fear and alarm. |
| Public Prosecutor v Muhamad Hasik bin Sahar | High Court | Yes | [2002] 1 SLR(R) 1069 | Singapore | Cited regarding the aggravating factor of committing an offence in a public place causing public fear and alarm. |
| Public Prosecutor v BDB | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2018] 1 SLR 127 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that committing an offence out of anger or strong emotions is generally not a mitigating factor. |
| Keeping Mark John v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2017] 5 SLR 627 | Singapore | Cited regarding the effect of an increase in the maximum sentence for an offence on sentencing decisions. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Section 307(1) of the Penal Code (Chapter 224, 2008 Revised Edition) | Singapore |
| Section 320(h) of the Penal Code | Singapore |
| Section 300 of the Penal Code | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Attempted murder
- Sentencing
- General deterrence
- Retribution
- Aggravating factors
- Mitigating factors
- Public disquiet
- Pre-planning
- Mens rea
- Culpability
- Harm
15.2 Keywords
- attempted murder
- sentencing
- criminal law
- singapore
- high court
- deterrence
- retribution
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Criminal Law | 95 |
| Attempted Murder | 95 |
| Sentencing | 90 |
| Criminal Procedure | 90 |
| Murder | 85 |
| Torts | 10 |
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Sentencing
- Attempted Murder