SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1985 MarsdenLR 924

LAI KEW CHAI
K ABDUL RASHEED – Appellant
Versus
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR – Respondent


Advocates:
Mohideen MP Haja Rubin for both appellants.
David Khor (Deputy Public Prosecutor) for the Public Prosecutor.

JUDGMENTBY: LAI KEW CHAI J

At the conclusion of the hearing of two Magistrates Appeals last Friday, which were heard together as they were both concerned with the ambit of section 183 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap. 113), I allowed both appeals, varied the orders of two learned District Judges and directed that the discharges in both the appeals amounted to acquittals. In addition to discharging my duty to do so, I am setting out my grounds in deference to since I found myself at variance with the written grounds of decisions of both the learned District Judges who have had much experience in the administration of criminal justice in the Subordinate Courts.

The two appeals arose in this way. In Magistrates Appeal No. 78 of 1984, Arnold Ah Chak, a detective sergeant of the Singapore Police Force, faced two charges that he on two different days in June, 1983 did corruptly obtain for himself from two prostitutes gratifications in the form of sexual intercourse as inducements to return them their passports and not putting them on the blacklist for immigration purposes. He was alleged to have committed offences under section 6(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (Cap. 104). When

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top