BLV v Public Prosecutor: Sexual Assault, Abuse of Process & Sentencing
The Singapore Court of Appeal heard the appeal of BLV against his conviction and sentence for multiple charges of sexual assault against his biological daughter. The High Court had convicted BLV and sentenced him to 23 years and six months' imprisonment with 24 strokes of the cane. BLV appealed, seeking to introduce further evidence, which the court found to be falsified. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and enhanced the sentence by four years and six months for abuse of process, resulting in a total sentence of 28 years' imprisonment with 24 strokes of the cane.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Court of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Appeal Dismissed
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Singapore Court of Appeal affirms BLV's conviction for sexual assault and enhances his sentence for abusing court process by falsifying evidence.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Respondent | Government Agency | Appeal Dismissed | Won | April Phang of Attorney-General’s Chambers James Chew of Attorney-General’s Chambers Mohamed Faizal of Attorney-General’s Chambers Amanda Chong Wei-zhen of Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| BLV | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Sundaresh Menon | Chief Justice | Yes |
| Andrew Phang Boon Leong | Judge of Appeal | No |
| Tay Yong Kwang | Judge of Appeal | No |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| April Phang | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| James Chew | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Mohamed Faizal | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Amanda Chong Wei-zhen | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Ramesh Tiwary | Ramesh Tiwary |
4. Facts
- The Appellant was accused of sexually abusing his biological daughter between 2011 and 2014.
- The Appellant allegedly penetrated the Victim’s mouth and anus with his penis without her consent.
- The Appellant claimed he had a deformed penis due to a failed enlargement procedure, making penetration improbable.
- The High Court rejected the Appellant’s claim about his penile deformity.
- The Appellant sought to adduce further evidence on appeal to support his penile deformity defence.
- The Court of Appeal found the further evidence to be untruthful and an abuse of process.
- The Court of Appeal enhanced the Appellant’s sentence due to the abuse of process.
5. Formal Citations
- BLV v Public Prosecutor, Criminal Appeal No 10 of 2017, [2019] SGCA 62
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Appellant married the Victim’s mother | |
| Victim was born | |
| Appellant underwent penis enlargement procedures in Johor Bahru | |
| Appellant underwent penis enlargement procedures in Johor Bahru | |
| Appellant and Witness knew each other | |
| First incident of sexual abuse occurred | |
| Witness allegedly saw the Appellant’s penis at Singapore Expo | |
| Last incident of sexual abuse occurred | |
| Victim disclosed the Appellant’s acts of sexual abuse to the Mother | |
| Mother reported the Appellant’s acts of sexual abuse against the Victim to the police | |
| Mother applied for a Personal Protection Order against the Appellant and filed for divorce | |
| Dr Krishnamoorthy’s Report was issued | |
| Dr Pathy’s Report was issued | |
| Mother obtained a divorce | |
| Appellant filed his Case for the Defence | |
| Dr Lee’s medical report was issued | |
| Criminal Appeal No 10 of 2017 filed | |
| Public Prosecutor v BLV [2017] SGHC 154 issued | |
| First hearing of the appeal | |
| Appellant allegedly bumped into the Witness at Bussorah Street | |
| Deadline for filing criminal motion to adduce further evidence | |
| Parties appeared before the court again | |
| BLV v Public Prosecutor [2019] SGCA 6 issued | |
| Court dismissed the appeal and gave brief reasons | |
| Grounds of Decision issued |
7. Legal Issues
- Sexual assault by penetration
- Outcome: The court upheld the conviction for sexual assault by penetration.
- Category: Substantive
- Outrage of modesty of person under 14
- Outcome: The court upheld the conviction for outrage of modesty.
- Category: Substantive
- Abuse of process
- Outcome: The court found that the Appellant had abused the process of the court by falsifying evidence and procuring another to do the same.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Falsification of evidence
- Perjury
- Sentencing principles
- Outcome: The court enhanced the sentence to reflect the abuse of process and the lack of remorse.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Retribution
- General deterrence
- Specific deterrence
- Totality principle
8. Remedies Sought
- Appeal against conviction
- Appeal against sentence
9. Cause of Actions
- Sexual Assault
- Outrage of Modesty
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Law
- Appeals
- Sentencing
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor v BLV | High Court | Yes | [2017] SGHC 154 | Singapore | The High Court judge rejected the Appellant’s contentions in relation to the alleged deformity of his penis at the time of the offences and convicted him of all ten charges that were preferred against him. |
| BLV v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2019] SGCA 6 | Singapore | The Court of Appeal found that the Appellant had colluded with the witness to falsify the further evidence, and that this amounted to an abuse of the process of the court. |
| Public Prosecutor v NF | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2006] 4 SLR(R) 849 | Singapore | Cited for the sentencing framework for sexual assault by penetration. |
| Ng Kean Meng Terence v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2017] 2 SLR 449 | Singapore | Cited for the sentencing framework for the offence of rape. |
| Public Prosecutor v Muhammad Farid bin Mohd Yusop | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2015] 3 SLR 16 | Singapore | Cited for the burden which the Appellant had to overcome to convince the court to set aside the Judge’s factual findings on appeal. |
| Pram Nair v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2017] 2 SLR 1015 | Singapore | Cited for the sentencing bands for the offence of digital-vaginal penetration under s 376(2)(a) of the PC. |
| Public Prosecutor v Mohd Ariffan bin Mohd Hassan | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2018] 1 SLR 544 | Singapore | Cited for the concept of proportionality as a guide for determining whether to allow applications to adduce further evidence on appeal. |
| Kho Jabing v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2016] 3 SLR 135 | Singapore | Cited for the integrity of the judicial process. |
| Ong Seng Hwee v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [1999] 3 SLR(R) 1 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that where an accused person conducts his defence abusively, be it at first instance or on appeal, this can fairly be taken into consideration for sentencing purposes. |
| Public Prosecutor v Chua Hock Leong | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2018] SGCA 32 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the conduct of a defence at a trial in a manner which shamed the victim demonstrated a clear lack of remorse on the part of the accused person, which warranted the imposition of a stiffer sentence. |
| Public Prosecutor v BNO | High Court | Yes | [2018] SGHC 243 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the conduct of a defence at a trial in a manner which shamed the victim demonstrated a clear lack of remorse on the part of the accused person, which warranted the imposition of a stiffer sentence. |
| Cheang Geok Lin v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2018] 4 SLR 548 | Singapore | Cited for how the accused person’s conduct in absconding while on bail for an offence that he had already been charged with should affect the sentence for that offence. |
| Teo Hee Heng v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2000] 2 SLR(R) 351 | Singapore | Cited as reference points for the extent of the uplift to be imposed. |
| Thong Sing Hock v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2009] 3 SLR(R) 47 | Singapore | Cited as reference points for the extent of the uplift to be imposed. |
| Ang Lilian v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2017] 4 SLR 1072 | Singapore | Cited as reference points for the extent of the uplift to be imposed. |
| Public Prosecutor v Low Ji Qing | High Court | Yes | [2019] SGHC 174 | Singapore | Cited for the principle of proportionality in the context of criminal sentencing. |
| Public Prosecutor v ASR | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2019] 1 SLR 941 | Singapore | Cited for the principle of retribution. |
| Lim Ghim Peow v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2014] 4 SLR 1287 | Singapore | Cited for the principle of specific deterrence. |
| Tan Kay Beng v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2006] 4 SLR(R) 10 | Singapore | Cited for the principle of general deterrence. |
| Chew Eng Han v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2017] 2 SLR 1130 | Singapore | Cited for the efficient and expeditious conduct of criminal proceedings. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 354(2) | Singapore |
| Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 376 | Singapore |
| Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 376(1)(a) | Singapore |
| Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 376(2)(a) | Singapore |
| Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 376(4)(b) | Singapore |
| Children and Young Persons Act (Cap 38, 2001 Rev Ed) s 7(a) | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) s 261(1) | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) s 328 | Singapore |
| Penal Code s 172 | Singapore |
| Penal Code s 174 | Singapore |
| Penal Code s 193 | Singapore |
| Penal Code s 204B(c) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Sexual assault
- Penile penetration
- Abuse of process
- Falsified evidence
- Sentencing principles
- Penile deformity
- Victim impact statement
- General deterrence
- Specific deterrence
- Retribution
- Totality principle
15.2 Keywords
- Sexual assault
- Abuse of process
- Sentencing
- Criminal law
- Singapore
- Appeal
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Sexual Offences | 100 |
| Criminal Procedure | 100 |
| Criminal Law | 100 |
| Children and Young Persons Act | 90 |
| Penal Code | 80 |
| Procedural fraud | 70 |
| Private Prosecution | 30 |
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Sentencing
- Abuse of Process
- Sexual Offences