Low Song Chye v Public Prosecutor: Voluntarily Causing Hurt & Sentencing Appeal
In Low Song Chye v Public Prosecutor, the High Court of Singapore heard appeals from both the accused and the prosecution regarding a conviction for voluntarily causing hurt. The accused, Low Song Chye, appealed against his conviction, sentence, and a compensation order, while the prosecution appealed against the sentence. The High Court dismissed Low Song Chye's appeals and allowed the prosecution's appeal, enhancing the sentence to four months' imprisonment. The case involved a charge under Section 323 of the Penal Code.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Accused's appeals dismissed; Prosecution's appeal allowed, enhancing the sentence to four months' imprisonment.
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
The High Court heard appeals against conviction, sentence, and compensation order for voluntarily causing hurt. The court dismissed the accused's appeals and enhanced the sentence.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Respondent, Appellant | Government Agency | Appeal Allowed | Won | Hay Hung Chun of Independent Practitioner Sheryl Yeo of Independent Practitioner |
| Low Song Chye | Appellant, Respondent | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost | Sunil Sudheesan of Independent Practitioner Ngiam Hian Theng Diana of Independent Practitioner Joel Ng of Independent Practitioner |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| See Kee Oon | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Hay Hung Chun | Independent Practitioner |
| Sheryl Yeo | Independent Practitioner |
| Sunil Sudheesan | Independent Practitioner |
| Ngiam Hian Theng Diana | Independent Practitioner |
| Joel Ng | Independent Practitioner |
4. Facts
- The accused was the manager of KG Pearl, a karaoke pub.
- The victim worked as a singer at KG Pearl.
- On 12 July 2016, the victim went to collect her salary but was dissatisfied with the amount.
- The victim threw pool balls around in a tantrum.
- The accused grabbed the victim's neck and slapped her.
- The victim sustained a left anterior central tympanic membrane perforation and mild conductive hearing loss.
- The Magistrate convicted the accused and sentenced him to 12 weeks’ imprisonment and ordered him to pay $800 in compensation.
5. Formal Citations
- Low Song Chye v Public Prosecutor, Magistrate’s Appeal No 9240 of 2018/01 and /02, [2019] SGHC 140
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Incident occurred at KG Pearl karaoke pub | |
| Victim examined again, developed left ear tinnitus and dizziness with nausea | |
| Victim's condition reviewed, eardrum perforation marginally smaller | |
| Victim underwent left onlay tympanoplasty | |
| Accused charged | |
| Magistrate’s Appeal No 9240 of 2018/01 | |
| Magistrate’s Appeal No 9240 of 2018/02 | |
| Magistrate's decision found in Public Prosecutor v Low Song Chye [2018] SGMC 68 | |
| Hearing date | |
| Judgment reserved |
7. Legal Issues
- Voluntarily Causing Hurt
- Outcome: The court found that the Magistrate did not err in holding that the elements of the charge had been proven beyond reasonable doubt.
- Category: Substantive
- Sentencing
- Outcome: The court allowed the Prosecution's appeal and enhanced the accused's imprisonment term to four months.
- Category: Procedural
- Compensation Order
- Outcome: The court dismissed the accused’s appeal against the compensation order made by the Magistrate.
- Category: Procedural
- Private Defence
- Outcome: The court agreed with the Magistrate that the defence of private defence did not apply on the facts.
- Category: Substantive
- Necessity
- Outcome: The court found that Section 81 of the Penal Code finds no application in this case.
- Category: Substantive
- Mens Rea
- Outcome: The court found that the Magistrate did not err in finding that the accused had slapped the victim, and Dr Ho’s evidence was that this slap must have been hard to generate enough force to cause the eardrum perforation.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Appeal against conviction
- Appeal against sentence
- Appeal against compensation order
9. Cause of Actions
- Voluntarily Causing Hurt
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Law
- Appeals
11. Industries
- Entertainment
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor v Low Song Chye | Magistrate's Court | Yes | [2018] SGMC 68 | Singapore | Cited as the Magistrate's grounds of decision in the case. |
| Koh Jing Kwang v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2015] 1 SLR 7 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the court can take into account the circumstances in which the First Information Report was made. |
| Tan Chor Jin v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2008] 4 SLR(R) 306 | Singapore | Cited for the requirements of the defence of private defence. |
| Public Prosecutor v BDB | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2018] 1 SLR 127 | Singapore | Cited for the two-step sentencing approach for cases involving charges under s 325 of the Penal Code. |
| Public Prosecutor v Holman, Benjamin John | High Court | Yes | [2018] SGHC 237 | Singapore | Cited as a case involving a s 323 charge where the accused was sentenced to two months' imprisonment on appeal. |
| Wong Hoi Len v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2009] 1 SLR(R) 115 | Singapore | Cited as an example of sentencing guidance in specific categories of s 323 offences. |
| Tay Wee Kiat and another v Public Prosecutor and another appeal | High Court | Yes | [2018] 4 SLR 1315 | Singapore | Cited as an example of sentencing guidance in specific categories of s 323 offences. |
| Public Prosecutor v Cheng Tai Peng | District Court | Yes | [2012] SGDC 121 | Singapore | Cited as a sentencing precedent for s 323 offences. |
| Public Prosecutor v Cheng Tai Peng | District Court | Yes | [2012] SGDC 104 | Singapore | Cited as a sentencing precedent for s 323 offences. |
| Public Prosecutor v Wong Jiaxin | District Court | Yes | [2010] SGDC 23 | Singapore | Cited as a sentencing precedent for s 323 offences. |
| Public Prosecutor v AOB | High Court | Yes | [2011] 2 SLR 793 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a custodial sentence is not imposed for a s 323 offence where the injuries are minor, there is a lack of premeditation, and the altercation is short. |
| Sim Yew Thong v Ng Loy Nam Thomas and other appeals | High Court | Yes | [2000] 3 SLR(R) 155 | Singapore | Cited as suggesting that a custodial sentence is not imposed for a s 323 offence where the injuries are minor, there is a lack of premeditation, and the altercation is short. |
| Chua Siew Peng v Public Prosecutor and another appeal | High Court | Yes | [2017] 4 SLR 1247 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the accused’s subsequent acts of aggression can be taken into account in sentencing. |
| Tay Wee Kiat and another v Public Prosecutor and another appeal | High Court | Yes | [2018] 5 SLR 438 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that Section 359 CPC imposes an obligation upon a court before which an offender is convicted to consider whether or not to order compensation and to make such an order if it considers it appropriate to do so. |
| Soh Meiyun v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2014] 3 SLR 299 | Singapore | Cited for the relevant principles for the exercise of the court’s discretion in imposing a compensation order. |
| Public Prosecutor v Donohue Enilia | High Court | Yes | [2005] 1 SLR(R) 220 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the court should adopt a broad common-sense approach in assessing whether compensation should be awarded, and not allow itself to be enmeshed in “refined questions of causation”. |
| Kee Leong Bee and another v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [1999] 2 SLR(R) 768 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the Magistrate did not exercise his discretion on demonstrably wrong principles and appellate intervention in relation to the compensation order is not warranted in this case. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 323 | Singapore |
| Penal Code s 81 | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) s 359 | Singapore |
| Penal Code s 97 | Singapore |
| Penal Code s 99(3) | Singapore |
| Penal Code s 102 | Singapore |
| Penal Code s 99(4) | Singapore |
| Penal Code s 52 | Singapore |
| Penal Code s 319 | Singapore |
| Penal Code s 325 | Singapore |
| Penal Code s 320(g) | Singapore |
| Penal Code s 143 | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Voluntarily causing hurt
- Eardrum perforation
- Mild conductive hearing loss
- Private defence
- Necessity
- Mens rea
- Compensation order
- Sentencing
- KG Pearl
- Tinnitus
15.2 Keywords
- Voluntarily causing hurt
- Criminal law
- Sentencing
- Singapore
- High Court
- Appeal
- Compensation order
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Sentencing | 90 |
| Criminal Procedure | 80 |
| Criminal Law | 75 |
| Assault | 60 |
| Personal Injury | 50 |
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Sentencing
- Voluntarily Causing Hurt