MUHAMAD ZULHILMI BIN MOHAMAD SAPARI v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

[2024] SGHC 209 High Court (General Division) 15 August 2024 • HC/MA 9008/2024/01 • 23 min read
14 cases cited

Key facts

Court High Court (General Division)
Decided
Judge Kannan Ramesh
Charges / claim Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure and Sentencing
Counsel Attorney-General's Chambers, Ong & Co LLC, Colin Ng Guan Wen, Tung Shou Pin, Wee Hong Shern (Huang Hongsheng)

Source: [2024] SGHC 209, High Court (General Division), decided — eLitigation. Updated .

Catchwords

Practice Areas

Judges (1)

Counsel (5)

Parties (2)

Case Significance

Muhamad Zulhilmi bin Mohamad Sapari v Public Prosecutor [2024] SGHC 209 was decided by Kannan Ramesh JAD in the General Division of the High Court on 15 August 2024, in Magistrate's Appeal No 9008 of 2024, with the matter heard on 24 May 2024. This was an appeal by the appellant, Mr Muhamad Zulhilmi Bin Mohamad Sapari, against the sentence imposed by the District Judge in Public Prosecutor v Muhamad Zulhilmi Bin Mohamad Sapari [2024] SGDC 15. Kannan Ramesh JAD dismissed the appeal on 24 May 2024 and delivered brief oral grounds, with these being the detailed grounds of decision.

The appellant, a 26-year-old Singaporean male, pleaded guilty on 17 January 2024 to two charges under the Misuse of Drugs Act (2020 Rev Ed) and one charge under the Corrosive and Explosive Substances and Offensive Weapons Act 1958 (2020 Rev Ed), and was convicted on all three charges. He was given a global sentence of five years' and 18 months' imprisonment and nine strokes of the cane, and the District Judge also imposed an enhanced sentence under s 50T(1)(a) of the Prisons Act 1933 (2020 Rev Ed) for the proceeded charges, which totalled 430 days' imprisonment for the enhanced sentences. The catchwords identified the issues as criminal law statutory offences under the Prisons Act, Misuse of Drugs Act and Corrosive and Explosive Substances and Offensive Weapons Act, and criminal procedure and sentencing on appeal; the Civil Defence Act and Criminal Procedure Code were also referenced. The appellant was represented by Ong & Co LLC, with counsel including Wee Hong Shern (Huang Hongsheng), while the Public Prosecutor was represented by the Attorney-General's Chambers, with counsel Tung Shou Pin and Colin Ng Guan Wen.

Summary

Muhamad Zulhilmi bin Mohamad Sapari appealed against the sentence imposed by a District Judge after he pleaded guilty to two charges under the Misuse of Drugs Act and one under the Corrosive and Explosive Substances and Offensive Weapons Act, having been given a global sentence of five years' and 18 months' imprisonment with nine strokes of the cane plus enhanced sentences under the Prisons Act, with eight further charges taken into consideration. Kannan Ramesh JAD considered the totality principle and found the aggregate sentence proportionate and not crushing, noting it was the appellant's third set of convictions and that he had a history of drug-related and hurt-related offences. The appeal against sentence was dismissed and the District Judge's decision on sentence affirmed.

What sentence was challenged in Muhamad Zulhilmi bin Mohamad Sapari v PP [2024] SGHC 209?

The 26-year-old appellant pleaded guilty to two Misuse of Drugs Act charges and one Corrosive and Explosive Substances and Offensive Weapons Act charge, receiving a global sentence of five years' and 18 months' imprisonment, nine strokes of the cane, plus 430 days' enhanced sentence under the Prisons Act.

What was the outcome of the appeal in Muhamad Zulhilmi bin Mohamad Sapari v PP [2024] SGHC 209?

Kannan Ramesh JAD dismissed the appellant's appeal against sentence on 24 May 2024 in Magistrate's Appeal No 9008 of 2024, delivering brief oral grounds, with [2024] SGHC 209 setting out the detailed grounds of decision.

Statutes Cited

Cases Cited (14)

SG (2)
[2022] SGDC 102 [2024] SGDC 15
SLR (12)
[2005] 1 SLR(R) 611 [2005] 3 SLR(R) 1 [2008] 4 SLR(R) 500 [2016] 5 SLR 936 [2018] 5 SLR 1289 [2018] 5 SLR 799 [2019] 2 SLR 764 [2019] 5 SLR 769 [2020] 2 SLR 970 [2021] 4 SLR 1220 [2022] 5 SLR 407 [2024] 3 SLR 1359

Related cases

Other Singapore judgments involving the same parties or counsel.

Referenced in

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.

Read on eLitigation

Source: eLitigation ([2024] SGHC 209)