PP v Mohd Taufik: Outrage of Modesty & Knowledge of Offending Modesty
Mohd Taufik bin Abu Bakar, a police inspector, was convicted in the District Court on six charges of outraging the modesty of five national servicemen (Special Constables). On appeal, the High Court acquitted Mohd Taufik on four of the six charges, reducing his sentence. The court focused on whether Mohd Taufik knew his actions would likely outrage the modesty of the Special Constables, considering the context of their relationships and the specific acts committed. The Prosecution's appeal against the sentence was dismissed.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Appeal allowed in part.
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Mohd Taufik, a police inspector, was convicted of outraging modesty of SCs. The High Court acquitted him on some charges, focusing on his knowledge.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Appellant | Government Agency | Appeal dismissed | Lost | Nicholas Lai Yi Shin |
| Mohd Taufik bin Abu Bakar | Respondent, Appellant | Individual | Appeal allowed in part | Partial | Mahmood Gaznavi s/o Bashir Muhammad, Khadijah Yasin |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Chan Seng Onn | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Mahmood Gaznavi s/o Bashir Muhammad | Mahmood Gaznavi & Partners |
| Khadijah Yasin | Mahmood Gaznavi & Partners |
| Nicholas Lai Yi Shin | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
4. Facts
- Mohd Taufik bin Abu Bakar was a police inspector and Officer-in-Charge in the Traffic Police.
- Mohd Taufik was accused of outraging the modesty of five national servicemen (Special Constables).
- The District Judge convicted Mohd Taufik of six charges related to four Special Constables.
- The charges involved applying hair removal cream, massaging, pinching, squeezing, slapping, and putting a hand around the waist.
- The High Court acquitted Mohd Taufik on four of the six charges.
- The High Court reduced Mohd Taufik's sentence in relation to the third charge from four months’ imprisonment to twelve weeks’ imprisonment.
- The High Court upheld the sentence in relation to the fourth charge, which was ordered to be run concurrently with the reduced sentence for the third charge.
5. Formal Citations
- Public Prosecutor v Mohd Taufik bin Abu Bakar and another appeal, , [2019] SGHC 90
- Public Prosecutor v Mohd Taufik Bin Abu Bakar, , [2018] SGMC 73
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Outrage of modesty occurred between January 2015 and July 2015 | |
| Outrage of modesty occurred between 8 June 2015 and July 2015 | |
| Outrage of modesty occurred on 13 September 2015 | |
| Outrage of modesty occurred between 8 June 2016 and 29 July 2016 | |
| Magistrate’s Appeal No 9199 of 2018/01 and 9199 of 2018/02 | |
| District Judge convicted the appellant of six charges | |
| Appeal heard | |
| Judgment issued |
7. Legal Issues
- Outrage of Modesty
- Outcome: The court considered the elements of the outrage of modesty charge, focusing on the knowledge element. The court held that the prosecution must prove that the accused knew that his actions would likely outrage the victim's modesty. The court considered the context of the relationship between the accused and the victim in determining whether the accused had the requisite knowledge.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Knowledge that the act is likely to outrage the modesty of that person
- Sentencing
- Outcome: The court considered the appropriate sentence for the charges of outrage of modesty, applying the two-step sentencing bands approach outlined in Kunasekaran s/o Kalimuthu Somasundara v Public Prosecutor [2018] 4 SLR 580.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
- [2018] 4 SLR 580
8. Remedies Sought
- Imprisonment
- Fine
- Caning
9. Cause of Actions
- Outrage of Modesty
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Law
11. Industries
- Law Enforcement
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GBR v Public Prosecutor and another appeal | High Court | Yes | [2018] 3 SLR 1048 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that victims of sexual crimes cannot be straightjacketed in the expectation that they must act or react in a certain manner. |
| Kunasekaran s/o Kalimuthu Somasundara v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2018] 4 SLR 580 | Singapore | Cited for the two-step sentencing bands approach for outrage of modesty cases under s 354(1) of the Penal Code. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 354(1) | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) s 394 | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Outrage of modesty
- Special Constable
- Knowledge
- Superior-subordinate relationship
- Mens rea
- Actus reus
- Hair removal cream
- Body scrub
- Pinching
- Squeezing
- Slapping
- Holding waist
15.2 Keywords
- Outrage of modesty
- Criminal law
- Singapore
- High Court
- Police
- Special Constable
- Sexual offence
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Outrage of Modesty
- Sentencing
17. Areas of Law
- Criminal Law
- Penal Code
- Outrage of Modesty
- Sentencing