BSR v Public Prosecutor: Appeal Against Sentence for Sexual Assault, Human Trafficking, and Outrage of Modesty
BSR appealed against the sentence imposed by the High Court for convictions on four charges: sexual assault of his daughter, human trafficking of his wife, receiving earnings from his wife's prostitution, and aggravated outrage of modesty of his niece. The Court of Appeal of Singapore, comprising Judith Prakash JA, Tay Yong Kwang JA, and Woo Bih Li J, dismissed the appeal, finding the sentences were not manifestly excessive. The appellant pleaded guilty to the charges, and the High Court sentenced him to a total of 25.5 years’ imprisonment, 24 strokes of the cane, and a fine of $12,000.
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
Ex Tempore Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Appeal against sentence for sexual assault, human trafficking, and outrage of modesty. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the sentences not excessive.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Respondent | Government Agency | Sentences Upheld | Won | Sruthi Boppana of Attorney-General’s Chambers Winston Man of Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| BSR | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Judith Prakash | Justice of the Court of Appeal | Yes |
| Tay Yong Kwang | Justice of the Court of Appeal | No |
| Woo Bih Li | Judge | No |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Sruthi Boppana | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Winston Man | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Zamiq Azmeer bin Borhanudin | Abdul Rahman Law Corporation |
| Mohammed Shafiq bin Haja Maideen | Abdul Rahman Law Corporation |
4. Facts
- The appellant pleaded guilty to charges including sexual assault of his daughter, human trafficking of his wife, and outrage of modesty of his niece.
- The appellant penetrated his six-year-old daughter's mouth with his penis and forced her to perform fellatio.
- The appellant coerced his wife into prostitution through physical abuse and threats.
- The appellant received $10,930 from his wife's earnings as a prostitute.
- The appellant molested his 13-year-old niece by pinning her to a bed and removing her clothes.
- The appellant suspected he had a sexually transmitted disease at the time of the offences.
- The appellant threatened his daughter that he would beat her up if she told anyone about the sexual assault.
5. Formal Citations
- BSR v Public Prosecutor and another matter, , [2020] SGCA 71
- BSR v Public Prosecutor, Criminal Appeal No 13 of 2019, Criminal Appeal No 13 of 2019
- BSR v Public Prosecutor, Criminal Motion No 8 of 2020, Criminal Motion No 8 of 2020
- Public Prosecutor v BSR, Criminal Case No 59 of 2018, Criminal Case No 59 of 2018
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Criminal Case No 59 of 2018 filed | |
| Criminal Appeal No 13 of 2019 filed | |
| Medical report on the appellant prepared | |
| Medical report on the appellant prepared | |
| Medical report on the appellant prepared | |
| Criminal Motion No 8 of 2020 filed | |
| Judgment delivered |
7. Legal Issues
- Excessiveness of Sentence
- Outcome: The Court of Appeal found that the sentences imposed by the Judge were not manifestly excessive and dismissed the appeal.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Wrongful influence of 'disgust factor'
- Incorrect determination of appropriate sentence
- Failure to consider the primary intention of the Prevention of Human Trafficking Act
- Insufficient weight on mitigating factors
- Related Cases:
- [2019] 2 SLR 764
- [2017] 2 SLR 2015
- [2014] 4 SLR 892
- [2020] SGDC 124
- [2018] SGHC 72
- [2017] 3 SLR 1048
- [2020] SGDC 57
- [2016] 4 SLR 1288
8. Remedies Sought
- Reduction of Sentence
9. Cause of Actions
- Sexual Assault
- Human Trafficking
- Outrage of Modesty
- Voluntarily Causing Hurt
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Law
- Appeals
- Sentencing
- Human Trafficking Law
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BPH v Public Prosecutor and another appeal | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2019] 2 SLR 764 | Singapore | Cited regarding the difficulty in differentiating the severity of sexual offences involving penetration and the potential influence of the 'disgust factor'. |
| Pram Nair v Public Prosecutor | N/A | Yes | [2017] 2 SLR 2015 | Singapore | Cited for the sentencing framework applied in cases of sexual offences. |
| Poh Boon Kiat v Public Prosecutor | N/A | Yes | [2014] 4 SLR 892 | Singapore | Cited for the sentencing framework in cases involving trafficking of women for prostitution under the Women’s Charter. |
| Public Prosecutor v Bhattacharya Priyanka Rajesh and another | District Court | Yes | [2020] SGDC 124 | Singapore | Cited to argue that the sentence for the second charge was manifestly excessive compared to precedents. |
| Public Prosecutor v BDA | High Court | Yes | [2018] SGHC 72 | Singapore | Cited for the sentencing framework for cases of aggravated outrage of modesty under s 354A(1). |
| GBR v Public Prosecutor | N/A | Yes | [2017] 3 SLR 1048 | Singapore | Cited for the approach in considering offence-specific factors in determining the appropriate band for sentencing. |
| Public Prosecutor v GCK | District Court | Yes | [2020] SGDC 57 | Singapore | Cited to argue that the sentence for the fourth charge was too harsh compared to the sentence in this case. |
| Janardana Jayasankarr v Public Prosecutor | N/A | Yes | [2016] 4 SLR 1288 | Singapore | Cited to emphasize that sentencing is ultimately a matter for the court to assess and determine. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 376(1)(a) | Singapore |
| Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 376(4)(b) | Singapore |
| Prevention of Human Trafficking Act (No 45 of 2014) s 3(1) | Singapore |
| Prevention of Human Trafficking Act (No 45 of 2014) s 4(1)(a) | Singapore |
| Prevention of Human Trafficking Act (No 45 of 2014) s 6(1) | Singapore |
| Prevention of Human Trafficking Act (No 45 of 2014) s 6(2) | Singapore |
| Penal Code s 354A(2)(b) | Singapore |
| Penal Code s 323 | Singapore |
| Penal Code s 354(2) | Singapore |
| Women’s Charter (Cap 353, 2009 Rev Ed) ss 140 | Singapore |
| Women’s Charter (Cap 353, 2009 Rev Ed) ss 146 | Singapore |
| Prevention of Human Trafficking Act s 4(2)(g) | Singapore |
| Prevention of Human Trafficking Act s 4(2)(e) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Sexual assault
- Human trafficking
- Outrage of modesty
- Sentencing
- Manifestly excessive
- Aggravating factors
- Mitigating factors
- Penile-oral penetration
- Abuse of trust
- Parliamentary Debates
15.2 Keywords
- Criminal appeal
- Sexual assault
- Human trafficking
- Outrage of modesty
- Singapore law
- Sentencing
- Criminal law
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Sentencing | 95 |
| Criminal Law | 95 |
| Criminal Procedure and Sentencing | 95 |
| Sexual Offences | 90 |
| Prevention of Human Trafficking Act | 85 |
| Penal Code | 80 |
| Civil Procedure | 10 |
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Sentencing
- Human Trafficking
- Sexual Offences