PP v Azlin & Ridzuan: Murder Sentencing Appeal for Child Scalding Case

In Public Prosecutor v Azlin bte Arujunah and Ridzuan bin Mega Abdul Rahman, the Court of Appeal of Singapore addressed the sentencing of Azlin for murder under section 300(c) of the Penal Code and Ridzuan for voluntarily causing grievous hurt. Azlin was sentenced to life imprisonment, while Ridzuan's sentence was adjusted to life imprisonment. The case involved the death of Azlin's son due to cumulative scald injuries inflicted by both parents.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

Court of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Azlin sentenced to life imprisonment; Ridzuan's sentence adjusted to life imprisonment.

1.3 Case Type

Criminal

1.4 Judgment Type

Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

The Court of Appeal sentenced Azlin to life imprisonment for murder under s 300(c) of the Penal Code, while Ridzuan's sentence was adjusted to life imprisonment.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Public ProsecutorAppellantGovernment AgencyAppeal Allowed in PartPartial
Norine Tan of Attorney-General’s Chambers
Mohamed Faizal SC of Attorney-General’s Chambers
Chong Kee En of Attorney-General’s Chambers
Azlin Binte ArujunahRespondentIndividualLife ImprisonmentLost
Ridzuan Bin Mega Abdul RahmanRespondentIndividualLife ImprisonmentLost

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Sundaresh MenonChief JusticeYes
Andrew Phang Boon LeongJustice of the Court of AppealNo
Judith PrakashJustice of the Court of AppealNo
Tay Yong KwangJustice of the Court of AppealNo
Steven ChongJustice of the Court of AppealNo

4. Counsels

4. Facts

  1. Azlin and Ridzuan abused the Deceased for months before the scalding incidents.
  2. The Deceased was scalded on four separate occasions over a week.
  3. Azlin and Ridzuan confined the Deceased in a cat cage.
  4. Azlin and Ridzuan did not seek immediate medical attention for the Deceased.
  5. Azlin stated she wanted to take revenge on Ridzuan because the Deceased looked like him.
  6. The Judge found that Azlin did not fully comprehend the likelihood of death resulting from her actions.
  7. Azlin attempted to administer self-help treatments on the Deceased.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Public Prosecutor v Azlin bte Arujunah and another appeal, Criminal Appeals Nos 17 and 24 of 2020, [2022] SGCA 67
  2. Public Prosecutor v Azlin bte Arujunah and other appeals, , [2022] SGCA 52
  3. Public Prosecutor v Azlin bte Arujunah and another, , [2020] SGHC 168

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Incident 1: Azlin poured hot water on the Deceased multiple times.
Incident 2: Azlin and Ridzuan splashed hot water on the Deceased.
Incident 3: Azlin poured hot water on the Deceased.
Incident 4: Ridzuan splashed hot water on the Deceased, who later died.
Criminal Appeal No 17 of 2020 filed by Public Prosecutor against Azlin Binte Arujunah.
Criminal Appeal No 24 of 2020 filed by Public Prosecutor against Ridzuan Bin Mega Abdul Rahman.
Court of Appeal hearing.
Court of Appeal hearing.
Judgment reserved.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Appropriate Sentence for Murder under Section 300(c) of the Penal Code
    • Outcome: The court held that Azlin did not manifest such a blatant disregard for human life as to warrant the death penalty and sentenced her to life imprisonment.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Blatant disregard for human life
      • Consideration of offender's state of mind and motivation
      • Relevance of cruelty and inhumane treatment
    • Related Cases:
      • [2015] 2 SLR 112
      • [2019] 2 SLR 439
  2. Appropriate Aggregate Sentence for Multiple Offences
    • Outcome: The court held that the aggregate sentence of life imprisonment adequately reflected Ridzuan's total culpability and harm caused and removed the sentence of caning.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Application of the totality principle
      • Sentencing parity between co-offenders
    • Related Cases:
      • [2019] 4 SLR 838
      • [2005] 4 SLR(R) 249
      • [2018] 5 SLR 799

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Death Penalty
  2. Life Imprisonment

9. Cause of Actions

  • Murder
  • Voluntarily Causing Grievous Hurt

10. Practice Areas

  • Criminal Appeals

11. Industries

  • No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Public Prosecutor v Azlin bte Arujunah and other appealsCourt of AppealYes[2022] SGCA 52SingaporeThe earlier judgment where the Prosecution’s appeal was allowed and Azlin was convicted of murder.
Chan Lie Sian v Public ProsecutorCourt of AppealYes[2019] 2 SLR 439SingaporeCited for the principle that the court should not be distracted by the gruesomeness of the crime scene when determining whether to impose the death penalty.
Public Prosecutor v Kho JabingCourt of AppealYes[2015] 2 SLR 112SingaporeCited for the principles guiding the imposition of the death penalty, specifically when the offender's actions 'outrage the feelings of the community' and exhibit a 'blatant disregard for human life'.
Virsa Singh v State of PunjabSupreme CourtYesAIR 1958 SC 465IndiaCited for the mens rea required for a conviction under section 300(c) of the Penal Code.
Micheal Anak Garing v Public Prosecutor and another appealCourt of AppealYes[2017] 1 SLR 748SingaporeCited as an example where the nature of injuries and persistence of attack showed blatant disregard for human life.
Public Prosecutor v Chia Kee Chen and another appealCourt of AppealYes[2018] 2 SLR 249SingaporeCited as an example where the nature of injuries and persistence of attack showed blatant disregard for human life.
Public Prosecutor v Poopathi Chinaiyah s/o PaliandiCourt of AppealYes[2020] 5 SLR 734SingaporeCited for the principle that section 306(2) of the CPC only applies to sentences of imprisonment.
Public Prosecutor v BDBCourt of AppealYes[2018] 1 SLR 127SingaporeCited for the starting point for cases of voluntarily causing grievous hurt where death had been caused.
Gan Chai Bee Anne v Public ProsecutorCourt of AppealYes[2019] 4 SLR 838SingaporeCited for the two-step framework to determine the sentence for multiple offences.
Balakrishnan S and another v Public ProsecutorHigh CourtYes[2005] 4 SLR(R) 249SingaporeCited for the principle of sentencing parity.
Public Prosecutor v Raveen BalakrishnanHigh CourtYes[2018] 5 SLR 799SingaporeCited for the principle of sentencing parity.
Public Prosecutor v Azlin bte Arujunah and anotherHigh CourtYes[2020] SGHC 168SingaporeThe trial judge's findings and reasons for acquitting Azlin and Ridzuan of the original murder charges.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 300(c)Singapore
Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 302(2)Singapore
Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 326Singapore
Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 34Singapore
Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) s 307(2)Singapore
Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) s 306(2)Singapore
Children and Young Persons Act (Cap 38, 2001 Rev Ed) s 5(1)Singapore
Children and Young Persons Act (Cap 38, 2001 Rev Ed) s 5(5)(b)Singapore
Penal Code (Amendment) Act 2012 (Act 32 of 2012) s 2Singapore
Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 324Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Cumulative Scald Injury
  • Blatant Disregard for Human Life
  • Sentencing Parity
  • Totality Principle
  • Adjustment Disorder
  • Common Intention

15.2 Keywords

  • murder
  • sentencing
  • child abuse
  • scald injuries
  • life imprisonment
  • death penalty
  • Singapore
  • Court of Appeal

17. Areas of Law

16. Subjects

  • Criminal Law
  • Sentencing
  • Child Abuse