Gaiyathiri d/o Murugayan v Public Prosecutor: Culpable Homicide, Sentencing Appeal, Psychiatric Conditions

Gaiyathiri d/o Murugayan appealed to the Court of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore against her 30-year imprisonment sentence for 28 offences, including culpable homicide not amounting to murder of her foreign domestic worker. The High Court Judge sentenced Gaiyathiri to 20 years for the culpable homicide charge. The Court of Appeal, comprising Andrew Phang Boon Leong JCA, Judith Prakash JCA, and Steven Chong JCA, heard the appeal on 29 June 2022 and dismissed it, finding no grounds to intervene in the original sentence.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

Court of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Appeal Dismissed

1.3 Case Type

Criminal

1.4 Judgment Type

Ex Tempore Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Appeal against a 30-year sentence for culpable homicide. The court considered the appellant's psychiatric conditions but dismissed the appeal.

1.7 Decision Date

28 June 2022

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party Name	Role	Type	Outcome	Outcome Type	Counsels
Public Prosecutor	Respondent	Government Agency	Appeal Dismissed	Won	Mohamed Faizal of Attorney-General’s Chambers Sean Teh of Attorney-General’s Chambers
Gaiyathiri d/o Murugayan	Appellant	Individual	Appeal Dismissed	Lost

3. Judges

Judge Name	Title	Delivered Judgment
Andrew Phang Boon Leong	Justice of the Court of Appeal	Yes
Judith Prakash	Justice of the Court of Appeal	No
Steven Chong	Justice of the Court of Appeal	No

4. Counsels

Counsel Name	Organization
Mohamed Faizal	Attorney-General’s Chambers
Sean Teh	Attorney-General’s Chambers

4. Facts

The appellant pleaded guilty to 28 offences, including culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
The victim was the appellant's foreign domestic worker.
The abuse inflicted over the night of 25 Jul 2016 up to the early hours of 26 July 2016 led to the Victim’s death.
The appellant was diagnosed with Major Depressive Disorder with peripartum onset with moderate severity and Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder.
The Judge sentenced the appellant to a global term of 30 years’ imprisonment, imposing the maximum sentence of 20 years’ imprisonment for the s 304(a) charge.

5. Formal Citations

Gaiyathiri d/o Murugayan v Public Prosecutor, Criminal Appeal No 21 of 2021, [2022] SGCA 49

6. Timeline

Date	Event
2015-05-01	Victim started work in the appellant’s household
2016-07-26	Victim’s death
2018-01-01	Criminal Case No 47 of 2018 filed
2021-02-23	Plea taken and recorded
2021-03-30	Mr Joseph Chen took over conduct of the appellant’s matter
2021-04-29	Court hearing
2021-06-22	Judge delivered his decision on sentence
2021-01-01	Criminal Appeal No 21 of 2021 filed
2022-05-04	CM 3 dismissed
2022-06-29	Appeal dismissed

7. Legal Issues

Whether the appellant can rely on Dr Rajesh’s diagnosis of Obsessive Compulsive Disorder in this appeal
- Outcome: The appellant is precluded from relying on Dr Rajesh’s diagnosis of OCD, which is inconsistent with Dr Yeo’s assessment of her psychiatric conditions, as set out in the Statement of Facts.
- Category: Procedural
Whether the appellant has demonstrated any ground for this court to intervene with the Judge’s decision on sentence
- Outcome: The appellant has not demonstrated any ground on which the court may intervene with the Judge’s decision on sentence.
- Category: Substantive

8. Remedies Sought

Appeal against sentence

9. Cause of Actions

Culpable Homicide Not Amounting to Murder

10. Practice Areas

Criminal Appeals

11. Industries

No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case Name	Court	Affirmed	Citation	Jurisdiction	Significance
Public Prosecutor v Gaiyathiri d/o Murugayan	High Court	Yes	[2021] SGHC 187	Singapore	Sets out the facts relating to the offences.
Gaiyathiri d/o Murugayan v Public Prosecutor	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2022] SGCA 38	Singapore	Relates to the dismissal of the appellant's application for discovery and leave to adduce further evidence.
Public Prosecutor v Dinesh s/o Rajantheran	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2019] 1 SLR 1289	Singapore	Cited for the principle that a court will take a dim view of assertions where an accused person seeks to retract his guilty plea at the post-sentence stage.
Yunani bin Abdul Hamid v Public Prosecutor	High Court	Yes	[2008] 3 SLR(R) 383	Singapore	Cited regarding external pressures on accused persons leading to a guilty plea.
Chng Leng Khim v Public Prosecutor and another matter	High Court	Yes	[2015] 5 SLR 1219	Singapore	Cited regarding external pressures on accused persons leading to a guilty plea.
Public Prosecutor v Mohammed Liton Mohammed Syeed Mallik	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2008] 1 SLR(R) 601	Singapore	Cited for the limited scope of an appellate court to intervene when reappraising sentences imposed by a court at first instance.
Lim Ghim Peow v Public Prosecutor	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2014] 4 SLR 1287	Singapore	Cited for the principle that protective and retributive principles of sentencing will prevail where the offence is particularly serious or heinous.
Chew Soo Chun v Public Prosecutor and another appeal	High Court	Yes	[2016] 2 SLR 78	Singapore	Cited for the three kinds of mitigating circumstances in law.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute Name	Jurisdiction
Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed)	Singapore
s 304(a) of the Penal Code	Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

Culpable homicide
Sentencing appeal
Psychiatric conditions
Statement of facts
Manifestly excessive
Mitigating circumstances
Judicial mercy

15.2 Keywords

culpable homicide
sentencing
appeal
psychiatric condition
domestic worker
abuse

17. Areas of Law

Area Name	Relevance Score
Criminal Law	90
Sentencing	90
Criminal Procedure	90
Sentencing Guidelines	90
Sentencing Appeals	90
Criminal Revision	60

16. Subjects

Criminal Law
Sentencing
Appeals