Clause 32

it is sufficient for the charge —

to specify the gross sum in respect of which the offence is alleged to have been committed without specifying particular items; and

to specify the dates between which the offence is alleged to have been committed (being a period that does not exceed 12 months) without specifying exact dates; and

the charge so framed is deemed to be a charge of one offence.(3) For the purposes of subsection (2), the offences are as follows:

any offence under section 403, 404, 406, 407, 408, 409, 411, 412, 413 or 414 of the Penal Code (Cap. 224);

any offence under section 43, 44, 46 or 47 of the Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act (Cap. 65A);

any other offence (being an offence involving property) that is prescribed.(4) Despite subsections (1) and (2) and section 132, where 2 or more incidents of the commission of the same offence by the accused are alleged, and those alleged incidents taken together amount to a course of conduct (having regard to the time, place or purpose of each alleged incident) —

it is sufficient to frame one charge for all of those alleged incidents, if all of the following conditions are satisfied:

the charge —

contains a statement that the charge is amalgamated under this subsection;

either —

contains a statement that all of those alleged incidents taken together amount to a course of conduct; and

specifies the dates between which all of those incidents are alleged to have occurred, without specifying the exact date for each particular alleged incident;

if a separate charge had been framed in respect of each of those incidents, the maximum punishment for the offence specified in each separate charge would be the same maximum punishment;

the charge so framed does not specify any offence punishable with death; and

the charge so framed is deemed to be a charge of one offence.Illustrations(a)A is charged under section 465 of the Penal Code (Cap. 224) with committing forgery by making a false document. By virtue of section 463 of that Code, A’s conduct in making the false document is conduct that is an element of the offence that A is charged with.(b)A is charged under section 325 of the Penal Code with voluntarily causing grievous hurt to B. A’s conduct in causing grievous hurt to B is conduct that is an element of the offence that A is charged with.(c)A is charged under section 426 of the Penal Code with committing mischief by setting fire to a dustbin, and thereby causing the destruction of the dustbin. By virtue of section 425 of that Code, the destruction of the dustbin is an outcome (caused by A’s conduct of setting fire to the dustbin) that is an element of the offence that A is charged with.(d)A is charged under section 417 of the Penal Code with cheating B by deceiving B, and thereby intentionally inducing B to do a thing which B would not do if B were not so deceived. By virtue of section 415 of that Code, the thing that B is induced to do is an outcome (caused by A’s conduct of deceiving B) that is an element of the offence that A is charged with.(5) For the purposes of subsection (4), 2 or more alleged incidents of the commission of an offence, taken together, may amount to a course of conduct, if one or more of the following circumstances exist:

where the offence is one that has an identifiable victim, the victim in each alleged incident is the same person or belongs to the same class of persons;

all of the alleged incidents involve the employment of the same method or similar methods;

all of the alleged incidents occurred in the same place, in similar places, or in places that are located near to each other;

all of the alleged incidents occurred within a defined period that does not exceed 12 months.(6) To avoid doubt, subsection (5) does not contain an exhaustive list of the circumstances where 2 or more alleged incidents of the commission of an offence, taken together, may amount to a course of conduct.(7) Subsection (4) ceases to apply to 2 or more alleged incidents of the commission of the same offence by the accused, if the accused indicates that the accused intends to rely on a different defence in relation to each of those alleged incidents.(8) Subject to subsection (7), where a charge is framed under subsection (2) or (4), and a person is convicted of the offence specified in that charge —

the court may sentence that person —

in any case where the charge is framed under subsection (2) — to 2 times the amount of punishment to which that person would otherwise have been liable for that offence; or

in any case where the charge is framed under subsection (4) — to 2 times the amount of punishment to which that person would otherwise have been liable if that person had been charged with and convicted of any one of the incidents of commission of the offence mentioned in that subsection; but(b)any sentence of caning imposed by the court in respect of that offence must not exceed the specified limit in section 328.(9) Despite anything to the contrary in this Code, where a Magistrate’s Court or District Court would (apart from this section) have jurisdiction and power to try a particular type of offence, and a charge specifying an offence of that type is framed under subsection (2) or (4) — the Magistrate’s Court or District Court (as the case may be) —

has jurisdiction to hear and determine all proceedings for the offence specified in that charge; and

has power to award the full punishment provided under subsection (8) in respect of the offence specified in that charge.(10) Subsections (8) and (9) do not apply to a charge framed under subsection (2) or (4) in respect of any act or omission that took place before the date of commencement of section 32 of the Criminal Justice Reform Act 2018.”.