Public Prosecutor v BWJ: Aggravated Rape, Acquittal Appeal, and Sentencing

The Public Prosecutor appealed against the High Court's decision to acquit BWJ of aggravated rape of V. BWJ and V were in a relationship that ended prior to the alleged rape. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, set aside the acquittal, and convicted BWJ, finding that V did not consent to the sexual intercourse and that BWJ used violence. BWJ was sentenced to 13 years' imprisonment and 12 strokes of the cane.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

Court of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Appeal Allowed

1.3 Case Type

Criminal

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

The Court of Appeal allowed the prosecution's appeal, setting aside the acquittal and convicting BWJ of aggravated rape, emphasizing the lack of consent and violence used.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Public ProsecutorAppellantGovernment AgencyAppeal AllowedWon
Ng Yiwen of Attorney-General’s Chambers
Selene Yap Wan Ting of Attorney-General’s Chambers
Yvonne Poon Yirong of Attorney-General’s Chambers
BWJRespondentIndividualConvictedLost

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Judith PrakashJustice of the Court of AppealNo
Tay Yong KwangJustice of the Court of AppealYes
Woo Bih LiJudge of the Appellate DivisionNo

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Ng YiwenAttorney-General’s Chambers
Selene Yap Wan TingAttorney-General’s Chambers
Yvonne Poon YirongAttorney-General’s Chambers
Luke Anton NettoNetto & Magin LLC
Chia Ru Yun Megan JoanTan Rajah & Cheah
Tay Beng Tiat ReubenTan Rajah & Cheah

4. Facts

  1. BWJ and V were in a romantic relationship that ended prior to August 6, 2017.
  2. On August 2, 2017, BWJ returned to Singapore and entered V's flat without informing her.
  3. V avoided and ignored BWJ between August 2 and August 5, 2017.
  4. On August 6, 2017, BWJ asked V where she intended to move after the lease expired.
  5. BWJ slapped V, ripped her T-shirt and brassiere, and strangled her.
  6. BWJ ignored V's pleas and inserted his penis into her vagina.
  7. BWJ sent V numerous messages begging her not to file a police report.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Public Prosecutor v BWJ, Criminal Appeal No 20 of 2020, [2023] SGCA 2

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Alleged rape took place
BWJ was arrested and placed in remand
BWJ’s trial in the High Court commenced
Evidential portion of the trial concluded
Judge heard oral arguments and reserved judgment
BWJ was acquitted and the Judge gave brief oral grounds
Prosecution filed its notice of appeal
BWJ was released on bail pending the Prosecution’s appeal
BWJ was granted permission to travel to Johor Bahru
BWJ travelled to Johor Bahru
BWJ was given permission to remain in Malaysia until four weeks before the Prosecution’s appeal
Judge certified that the oral grounds constituted the full grounds of his decision
Supreme Court Registry informed the parties that the Prosecution’s appeal would be heard between 5 and 16 September 2022
BWJ returned to Singapore for the appeal
Prosecution’s appeal was heard and allowed. BWJ’s acquittal was set aside and he was convicted on the charge he faced
BWJ’s bail was fixed at $120,000 with one surety. BWJ was unable to furnish bail and was remanded pending sentencing
BWJ was sentenced to 13 years imprisonment and 12 strokes of the cane

7. Legal Issues

  1. Aggravated Rape
    • Outcome: The court found that the victim did not consent to sexual intercourse and that the accused used violence to facilitate the rape.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Lack of consent
      • Use of violence
  2. Appeal Against Acquittal
    • Outcome: The court allowed the appeal, finding that the trial judge's decision was against the weight of the evidence.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Weight of evidence
      • Credibility of witnesses
    • Related Cases:
      • [2007] 2 SLR(R) 983
      • [2022] 3 SLR 1417
  3. Sentencing for Aggravated Rape
    • Outcome: The court sentenced the accused to 13 years' imprisonment and 12 strokes of the cane, backdating the imprisonment term to the date of arrest but excluding the period of bail.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Offence-specific factors
      • Offender-specific factors
      • Mitigating factors
      • Remand and bail periods
    • Related Cases:
      • [2017] 2 SLR 449
      • [2008] 1 SLR(R) 601
      • [2015] 4 SLR 585
      • [2015] 5 SLR 122
      • [2010] 1 SLR 874

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Conviction
  2. Imprisonment
  3. Caning

9. Cause of Actions

  • Aggravated Rape

10. Practice Areas

  • Criminal Law
  • Appeals

11. Industries

  • No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Public Prosecutor v GCK and another matterHigh CourtNo[2020] 1 SLR 486SingaporeCited regarding the standard of proof required when a case turns on the credibility of the evidence.
Sakthivel Punithavathi v Public ProsecutorCourt of AppealYes[2007] 2 SLR(R) 983SingaporeCited for the principles governing appellate intervention in criminal matters.
Loh Der Ming Andrew v Koh Tien HuaCourt of AppealYes[2022] 3 SLR 1417SingaporeCited for the principle that an appellate court is justified in differing from the inferences drawn by a trial judge if they are not supported by the primary or objective evidence on record.
Ng Kean Meng Terence v Public ProsecutorCourt of AppealYes[2017] 2 SLR 449SingaporeCited for the framework for sentencing rape offences.
Public Prosecutor v Mohammed Liton Mohammed Syeed MallikHigh CourtNo[2008] 1 SLR(R) 601SingaporeCited regarding whether a prior relationship between an accused person and a victim could be an aggravating, a mitigating or a neutral factor.
Public Prosecutor v Sivanantha a/l DanabalaHigh CourtYes[2015] 4 SLR 585SingaporeCited for the principle that compliance with bail conditions is a relevant mitigating factor.
Vasentha d/o Joseph v Public ProsecutorHigh CourtYes[2015] 5 SLR 122SingaporeCited for the principle that the court will generally take into account periods that an accused person has spent in remand, even if there was a “break” in the period of custody during which the accused person was released on bail.
ADF v Public Prosecutor and another appealHigh CourtYes[2010] 1 SLR 874SingaporeCited for the principle that sentencing is not a science.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 375(1)(a)Singapore
Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 375(3)(a)(i)Singapore
Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) s 394Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Aggravated rape
  • Consent
  • Strangulation
  • Violence
  • Acquittal
  • Appeal
  • Sentencing
  • Bail
  • Remand
  • Relationship
  • WhatsApp messages

15.2 Keywords

  • Rape
  • Acquittal
  • Appeal
  • Sentencing
  • Singapore
  • Criminal Law

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Aggravated Rape95
Rape95
Criminal Law90
Sentencing85
Criminal Procedure85
Appeal70
Evidence50

16. Subjects

  • Criminal Law
  • Rape
  • Appeals
  • Sentencing