Judgment Header
Public Prosecutor v Siva a/l Sannasi [2015] SGHC 73
Court DecisionSGHC
[2015] SGHC 73
[2015] SGHC 73
General Division of the High Court of Singapore17 Mar 2015HC/Criminal Case No 9 of 2015
Published judgment text with court metadata, source links, and stable paragraph anchors.
Subsequent treatment
Cited in 3 later decisions. No negative treatment detected.
How this case connects
Citations and treatment detected automatically from later judgments and the authorities this decision relies on.
Cited by
3Later cases and laws citing this decision
“her words, someone like Farid – would certainly not be: Public Prosecutor v Yogaras Poongavanam [2015] SGHC 193 at [28]. This distinction explained the outcome in Public Prosecutor v Siva a/l Sannasi [2015] SGHC 73, which Mr Singh relied on. That case concerned an accused who had wrapped already packaged drugs in newsp”
“Hoo JC’s analysis of Chum Tat Suan, Yogaras and Public Prosecutor v Siva a/l Sannasi [2015] SGHC 73 (“Siva”) in these above-quoted paragraphs merits closer examination and we will do so in our subsequent analysis.”
“ath must be imminent, extreme and persistent (see Public Prosecutor v Wong Yoke Wah [1995] SGHC 213; Teo Hee Heng v Public Prosecutor [2000] 2 SLR(R) 351 at [11]; Public Prosecutor v Siva a/l Sannasi [2015] SGHC 73 at [23]; Public Prosecutor v Khartik Jasudass and another [2015] SGHC 199 at [98]–[99]).”
Authorities cited
0Earlier cases and laws this decision relies on
No outgoing citations detected.
Auto-detected from judgment text; not a substitute for a citator check.
Case Metadata
Case No: HC/Criminal Case No 9 of 2015
Case Metadata
Court: General Division of the High Court of Singapore
Case Metadata
Decision Date: 2015-03-17
Something wrong on this page?
Wrong text, a broken link, out-of-date content, or a removal request — tell us and we'll check it against the official source.