Public Prosecutor v BSV: Aggravated Outrage of Modesty, Rape, Criminal Intimidation
In Public Prosecutor v BSV, the High Court of Singapore heard a case involving nine charges against BSV, including aggravated outrage of modesty, aggravated rape, criminal intimidation, and voluntarily causing hurt, stemming from incidents in March 2016 involving his daughter. BSV claimed the sexual encounters were consensual, while the prosecution argued he committed the acts without consent and with violence. The court found BSV guilty on all nine charges, rejecting his defense of consent and finding the complainant's evidence credible and corroborated by supporting evidence.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Accused guilty and convicted of all nine charges.
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Judgment
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
BSV was convicted of aggravated sexual offenses against his daughter, including rape and criminal intimidation, after a trial in the High Court.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Prosecution | Government Agency | Judgment for Prosecution | Won | Sarah Siaw of Attorney-General’s Chambers Ng Yiwen of Attorney-General’s Chambers Kavita Uthrapathy of Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| BSV | Defendant | Individual | Convicted on all charges | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Hoo Sheau Peng | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Sarah Siaw | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Ng Yiwen | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Kavita Uthrapathy | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Lau Wen Jin | Dentons Rodyk & Davidson LLP |
4. Facts
- The accused was alone at home with the complainant, his daughter, in the early hours of 27 March 2016.
- The accused was angry about a police report lodged by the complainant's mother accusing him of molesting the complainant.
- The accused threatened the complainant with a penknife during the commission of the offences.
- The accused committed multiple sexual acts against the complainant, including rape and oral sex.
- The complainant reported the incident to the police later that day.
- The complainant was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) following the incident.
5. Formal Citations
- Public Prosecutor v BSV, Criminal Case No 54 of 2018, [2020] SGHC 115
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Complainant got married | |
| Accused incarcerated | |
| Accused released from prison | |
| Complainant's mother lodged a police report alleging molest | |
| Accused, complainant and RR gathered to drink whisky-green tea mixture | |
| Accused committed a series of offences against the complainant | |
| Complainant lodged a police report | |
| Accused arrested | |
| Dr Zheng examined the complainant | |
| Dr Zheng stated that the complainant continued to suffer from PTSD | |
| Trial began | |
| Trial concluded | |
| Judgment reserved |
7. Legal Issues
- Aggravated Outrage of Modesty
- Outcome: Accused found guilty.
- Category: Substantive
- Aggravated Rape
- Outcome: Accused found guilty.
- Category: Substantive
- Aggravated Sexual Assault by Penetration
- Outcome: Accused found guilty.
- Category: Substantive
- Criminal Intimidation
- Outcome: Accused found guilty.
- Category: Substantive
- Outrage of Modesty
- Outcome: Accused found guilty.
- Category: Substantive
- Voluntarily Causing Hurt
- Outcome: Accused found guilty.
- Category: Substantive
- Consent
- Outcome: Court rejected the accused's claim of consent.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Criminal Prosecution
- Imprisonment
9. Cause of Actions
- Aggravated Outrage of Modesty
- Aggravated Rape
- Aggravated Sexual Assault by Penetration
- Criminal Intimidation
- Outrage of Modesty
- Voluntarily Causing Hurt
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Litigation
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor v GCK | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2020] 1 SLR 486 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that uncorroborated evidence of a complainant may be the sole basis for a conviction if such evidence is unusually convincing. |
| Haliffie bin Mamat v Public Prosecutor and other appeals | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2016] 5 SLR 636 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that uncorroborated evidence of a complainant may be the sole basis for a conviction if such evidence is unusually convincing. |
| AOF v Public Prosecutor | Unknown | Yes | [2012] 3 SLR 34 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that uncorroborated evidence of a complainant may be the sole basis for a conviction if such evidence is unusually convincing and for the more liberal approach to corroborative evidence. |
| Public Prosecutor v Mohammed Liton Mohammed Syeed Mallik | Unknown | Yes | [2008] 1 SLR(R) 601 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that uncorroborated evidence of a complainant may be the sole basis for a conviction if such evidence is unusually convincing and for the strict and liberal approaches to corroborative evidence. |
| R v Baskerville | Court of King's Bench | No | [1916] 2 KB 658 | England and Wales | Cited for the strict approach to corroborative evidence, requiring independent evidence implicating the accused in a material particular. |
| Public Prosecutor v Mardai | Unknown | Yes | [1950] MLJ 33 | Malaysia | Cited for the principle that a subsequent complaint made by the complainant herself can be treated as corroboration if made at the first reasonable opportunity. |
| Public Prosecutor v Mohd Ariffan bin Mohd Hassan | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2019] 2 SLR 490 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that victims of sexual abuse may not react in the same way as other victims of crime and that there is no general rule requiring victims to report the offences immediately or in a timely fashion. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Penal Code | Singapore |
| s 354(1) of the Penal Code | Singapore |
| s 506 of the Penal Code | Singapore |
| s 376(1)(a) of the Penal Code | Singapore |
| s 376(4)(a)(ii) of the Penal Code | Singapore |
| s 354A(1) of the Penal Code | Singapore |
| s 375(1)(a) of the Penal Code | Singapore |
| s 375(3)(a)(ii) of the Penal Code | Singapore |
| s 323 of the Penal Code | Singapore |
| s 376G of the Penal Code | Singapore |
| s 79 of the Penal Code | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code | Singapore |
| s 22 of the Criminal Procedure Code | Singapore |
| s 23 of the Criminal Procedure Code | Singapore |
| s 264 of the Criminal Procedure Code | Singapore |
| Evidence Act | Singapore |
| s 157(c) of the Evidence Act | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Penknife
- Rape
- Consent
- Criminal Intimidation
- Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder
- Whisky-green tea mixture
15.2 Keywords
- Rape
- Sexual Assault
- Criminal Intimidation
- Incest
- Singapore Law
- High Court
- Family Violence
17. Areas of Law
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Sexual Offences
- Family Law