Ah nehs...

[LITTLEREDDOT]

Jail for man who called for then President Halimah’s death and threatened to stab judge​

Vickreman Harvey Chettiar published the social media post as he felt aggrieved over the executions of drug traffickers. PHOTO: ST FILE

Shaffiq Alkhatib
Feb 14, 2025

SINGAPORE - A man was out on bail for offences including harassment when he said in a story on Instagram in 2023 that then President Halimah Yacob “deserves to be dragged out” and killed.

Vickreman Harvey Chettiar published the social media post as he felt aggrieved over the executions of drug traffickers.

After he was charged, he told a police officer that he wanted to stab a judge who presided over his case at the time.

On Feb 12, Vickreman, 34, was sentenced to 10 months and 12 weeks’ jail after he pleaded guilty to three harassment charges. The Singaporean also admitted to one count of fabricating false evidence.

Fourteen other charges, including multiple counts of harassment, were considered during his sentencing.

Without revealing details, deputy public prosecutors Kevin Yong and Shaun Lim stated in court documents that Vickreman had earlier claimed to be suffering from mental disorders.

The Institute of Mental Health found his complaints to be unsubstantiated after examining him on two separate occasions.

On April 30, 2023, he published the Instagram story calling for Madam Halimah’s death.

Members of the public could view the post and one of them alerted the police.

Vickreman was charged in court over the post and District Judge Lorraine Ho imposed bail conditions, stating: “(The) accused is to delete all posts from his social media accounts as well as to delete all social media applications from all his electronic devices.

“The accused is not to log in to any social media accounts on any devices including those not belonging to him. The accused is not to post any posts or make any comments on any social media platforms or accounts.”

A trial was then fixed for March 5 to 7, 2024.

But on Feb 28 that year, Vickreman filled out a submission on the State Courts website, making several demands and declaring an intent not to attend the trial.

The State Courts saw the submission and one of its staff members replied by e-mail, advising him to desist from such behaviour and attend the trial.

On March 1, 2024, Vickreman, who was unhappy with the bail conditions, replied to the e-mail with a message that contained a threat of violence against Judge Ho.

The State Courts lodged a police report and the trial was vacated due to Vickreman’s claims of illness.

One week after sending his threatening e-mail, Vickreman called the police hotline and told an officer that he wanted to slash and stab the judge. The officer lodged a report on the matter.

Three days later, the prosecution applied to revoke Vickreman’s bail, partly on the basis that he had reoffended.

To help his then defence lawyer resist the prosecution’s application to revoke bail, Vickreman filed a police report on March 18, 2024.

The DPPs said: “The accused stated that the 999 call on March 8, 2024, was made to report that the accused’s e-mail account had been compromised, and that the accused was merely trying to report the contents of e-mails purportedly sent out from the accused’s e-mail address. This was however untrue.”

Another judge adjourned the hearing to March 22, 2024, but Vickreman failed to attend it. A warrant was then issued for his arrest.

He was arrested on April 5 that year before he appeared in court the next day. He has been remanded since then.

 

[LITTLEREDDOT]

Orchard Road fatal brawl: Jail, caning for 5 men who rained blows on ex-bouncer in 2023​

(Clockwise from top left) Sridharan Elangovan, Manojkumar Velayanatham, Sashikumar Pakirsamy, Raja Rishi, and Puthenvilla Keith Peter pleaded guilty to one count of rioting each.PHOTOS: ST FILE

Shaffiq Alkhatib
Feb 25, 2025

SINGAPORE – Five men linked to a 2023 fatal brawl around Concorde Hotel were sentenced to jail and caning on Feb 25 after they rained blows on a former bouncer who was allegedly killed later by another member of their group.

Three of the men – Sridharan Elangovan, 30, Manojkumar Velayanatham, 32, and Sashikumar Pakirsamy, 34 – were repeat offenders.

The trio were also members of the same secret society at the time of the attack on Mr Mohammad Isrrat Mohd Ismail, 29, which took place on the morning of Aug 20, 2023.

Sridharan, who was fined $4,500 in 2022 for voluntarily causing hurt, was sentenced to three years’ jail and six strokes of the cane on Feb 25.

Manojkumar was sentenced to 2½ years’ jail and four strokes of the cane. He was fined $3,000 in 2019 for assault.

Sashikumar, who was fined $3,000 in 2014 for using threatening words on a public servant, was sentenced to two years’ jail and two strokes of the cane for his latest offence.

In sentencing the trio, District Judge Eddy Tham said the fact they were secret society members at the time of the 2023 riot was not taken into consideration.

The judge added that their offences were not initiated by a gang leader and noted that it was Mr Isrrat’s group that had decided to arm themselves that morning.

However, Judge Tham stressed that an act of rioting with violence is taken very seriously, noting that Mr Isrrat was set upon by a large group of people and he was killed following an “opportunistic use” of a knife.

A fourth rioter, Raja Rishi, 28, was sentenced to 2½ years’ jail and four strokes of the cane on Feb 25 while a fifth offender, Puthenvilla Keith Peter, 26, was sentenced to two years and two months’ jail and three strokes of the cane.

On Feb 13, all five Singaporeans pleaded guilty to one count each of rioting.

A sixth man, Asvain Pachan Pillai Sukumaran, 30, was earlier handed a murder charge after he allegedly killed Mr Isrrat. His case is pending.

In earlier proceedings, deputy public prosecutors Kathy Chu and Brian Tan told the court that the six men and other members of the rioting group went to Club Rumours in Concorde Hotel and Shopping Mall in Orchard Road in the wee hours of Aug 20, 2023.

Around 4.45am, two of the club’s former bouncers – Mr Isrrat and Muhammad Shahrulnizam Osman – arrived there as Mr Isrrat wanted to pass his wedding invitation cards to its employees.

The prosecutors said both men were members of another secret society.

The club’s chief bouncer then noticed that men from the rioting group, which included members of another gang, were in the vicinity.

He alerted his colleagues, and several men, including Shahrulnizam and Mr Isrrat, armed themselves with knives.

Club Rumours closed around 6am, prompting patrons to leave and head to an exit towards Kramat Lane.

Mr Isrrat and Shahrulnizam yelled vulgarities at the men in the rioting group. Members of the group then confronted the pair.

A scuffle broke out and Shahrulnizam used a knife to slash three men. He and Mr Isrrat then ran off, pursued by the rioting group.

The prosecutors told the court that Mr Isrrat spotted a friend of the rioting group and stabbed the man on the forehead before fleeing. Meanwhile, Shahrulnizam, who was ahead of Mr Isrrat, headed to a corridor outside Club Rumours and handed the knife to one of its bouncers.

When Shahrulnizam turned back, he saw the rioting group running after Mr Isrrat.

Manojkumar, Sridharan, Sashikumar, Puthenvilla and Raja surrounded Mr Isrrat and rained blows on him.

Mr Isrrat ran away but Manojkumar, Puthenvilla and Raja caught up with him and kicked him.

Mr Isrrat managed to get away again and the group chased him. His knife fell to the ground when one of its members pushed him.

Five men, including Raja, Manojkumar and Sridharan, then kicked Mr Isrrat.

The prosecutors said: “Asvain picked up the small knife (Mr Isrrat) had dropped and stabbed (him) with it multiple times.”

After that, Sridharan landed one more kick on Mr Isrrat, who was bleeding profusely.

The group left the vicinity and the staff of Club Rumours called for an ambulance. Mr Isrrat was taken to Tan Tock Seng Hospital, where he was pronounced dead around 7am.

In December 2024, Shahrulnizam, then 31, was sentenced to two years and nine months’ jail, and ordered to receive 12 strokes of the cane.

He had pleaded guilty to offences including two counts of voluntarily causing hurt with a dangerous weapon.

 

[LITTLEREDDOT]

Jail, caning for man who slashed woman, 64, multiple times in robbery attempt​

Shaffiq Alkhatib
Mar 04, 2025, 07:42 PM

SINGAPORE - A homeless man, who could not work in Singapore as he was on a student pass, attacked a 64-year-old woman with a razor blade during a robbery attempt, causing multiple wounds on her neck and arms.

Indian national Shamsher Singh, who turns 27 on March 5, committed the offence in Mountbatten Road in November 2022 and fled the scene empty-handed.

The Singaporean victim, who was then working as a retail assistant, alerted the police after the attack. She was taken to Tan Tock Seng Hospital and was given 30 days of hospitalisation leave. The woman was unable to follow her daily routine for 63 days.

After a trial, Singh was convicted of one count of causing grievous hurt to the woman while attempting to commit robbery.

He also pleaded guilty to two unrelated charges – one count each of theft and voluntarily causing grievous hurt to a teenage boy.

On March 4, he was sentenced to 8½ years in jail, 12 strokes of the cane and a fine of $1,000.

In earlier proceedings, Deputy Public Prosecutor Tung Shou Pin told District Judge Lim Tse Haw that the victim, who was on her way home from work on Nov 10, 2022, got off bus service 31 at a bus stop near the Singapore Association for the Deaf at around 8.30pm.

DPP Tung added that Singh was sitting at the bus stop when he saw the woman walking towards the lift of a nearby overhead bridge, as she wanted to cross to the opposite side of the road.

The court heard that the woman’s legs were too weak to walk up the stairs of the overhead bridge.

The prosecutor said Singh then took out an unused disposable razor and unwrapped it.

He held the razor discreetly in his right hand by pinching it between his index finger and thumb.

The victim got off the lift, and Singh tailed her after he took the stairs up the overhead bridge.

DPP Tung told Judge Lim: “The victim made it about halfway across... Suddenly, the accused grabbed her from behind and covered her mouth with his left hand. He grabbed her so tightly that she could not move freely.

“The victim immediately struggled, but the accused cut her neck with the razor in his right hand before she could free herself... He repeatedly demanded money... Before she could pay up, he repeatedly slashed her arms with the razor.”

The victim continued struggling and managed to pull on Singh’s hoodie, dislodging his hood, which he quickly pulled up to conceal his face. As they tussled, the victim’s face mask fell off, and she shouted: “Robbery!”

Court documents stated that Singh covered the woman’s mouth with his hand to silence her, but she bit him to make him release his grip.

The DPP said that Singh bit her wrist before he dropped the razor on the bridge and fled.

The woman alerted the police, and officers arrested Singh when he was with his girlfriend at East Coast Park at around 2.20am the next day.

During the trial, Singh did not deny being at the overhead bridge and admitted he had caused the cuts on the victim’s arms.

However, he claimed that he was defending himself against the victim, who had supposedly attacked him first.

Singh said he had finished lessons at Trent Global College at Mountbatten Square at about 4pm on the day of the attack. He then met his girlfriend at Tekka Centre in Little India.

He claimed he later returned to Mountbatten Road and went up the overhead bridge, where he met the victim, and his right hand “accidentally brushed against her right hand” when he walked past her.

Singh said he apologised to the woman, but she hurled vulgarities and racial insults at him.

He testified that a scuffle broke out between them, and he “swung” a shaver at the victim’s left arm before fleeing the scene.

Stressing that the victim was a credible witness, the DPP said Singh should have gone to the police to complain about the victim’s purported attack on him.

“The accused had the gall to spin a nonsensical tale that the victim, a frail senior citizen, attacked him so viciously he had to cut her with a razor to free himself,” he added.

In an unrelated case, Singh, who was represented by lawyer Ranjit Singh, assaulted a 17-year-old boy in September 2022 and caused a fracture to the victim’s left wrist.

Sometime between Sept 29 and Oct 10, 2022, Singh stole a watch worth around $519 from his female housemate.

After moving out, he sent her a WhatsApp message on Oct 10, 2022, and she saw that he was wearing the watch in his profile picture.

She confronted him and he promised to return it to her. She alerted the police on Oct 24 that year when he failed to keep his word.

 

[LITTLEREDDOT]

Man who climbed into neighbour’s home to molest woman gets 7 months’ jail​

Nadine Chua
Mar 05, 2025

SINGAPORE – A man climbed into his neighbour’s condominium unit through the kitchen balcony and molested a woman while she was sleeping in her bedroom.

When she woke up, the man urinated in fear, pleading with her and her husband not to call the police.

On March 5, Erakkodan Abinraj, 26, was handed a jail term of seven months after pleading guilty to one count of molestation. Another count of housebreaking was considered during sentencing.

Deputy Public Prosecutor Kathy Chu said the Indian national had been living next door to the 36-year-old victim for around a year. He lived there with five of his colleagues and knew the victim as he had bumped into her before.

On Sept 22, 2024, at around 4.50am, Erakkodan entered the woman’s unit through the kitchen balcony, which was connected her unit and his.

As it was dark, Erakkodan turned on the torchlight on his mobile phone and wandered around the unit, looking at the woman’s family photos.

He then entered the master bedroom where the woman was asleep with her husband. Their daughter was asleep in another room.

Erakkodan then touched the woman’s underwear and pulled it downwards, wanting to remove it.

DPP Chu said: “The victim awoke as she felt someone touching her. She turned to her left to look at her husband and saw that he was sleeping. Puzzled, she turned to her right and saw the accused holding up his handphone with the torchlight on.”

The woman screamed, waking her husband, who confronted Erakkodan and asked him to leave the room.

As Erakkodan walked out of the room, he urinated in fear and pleaded with them not to call the police.

The woman called the police and Erakkodan remained in the victim’s home until the police arrived. He admitted to the couple that he had entered the unit through the kitchen balcony.

However, he denied touching the woman and lied that his mobile phone had dropped on her and woke her up.

Seeking six to eight months’ jail, DPP Chu said: “The offence took place in the victim’s bedroom, in the middle of the night. The accused invaded the sanctity of the home.”

The prosecutor added that the victim was vulnerable as she was asleep and that Erakkodan caused further inconvenience to the victim and her family by urinating in her home.

If convicted of molestation, an offender can be jailed for up to three years, fined and caned.

​

 

[LITTLEREDDOT]

Ex-head of PA youth network handed jail sentence for sexually assaulting teen​

Samuel Devaraj
Mar 10, 2025, 06:40 PM

SINGAPORE - A man who previously worked with young people at the People’s Association (PA) has been handed a jail sentence of 10 years and 6 months’ for sexually assaulting a boy when he was only 16 years old.

The court heard that Ranjeet Prasad manipulated the teen who had aspirations of becoming a singer or an actor. The abuse took place in 2007.

The accused, who the prosecution said showed a total lack of remorse, was found guilty on March 3 of three counts of having carnal intercourse against the order of nature.

In sentencing Ranjeet, District Judge John Ng took into account that there was abuse of the position of authority by the accused.

The judge said the incidents negatively impacted the victim’s life, adding: “He had a girlfriend at that point in time, and the incidents had left him questioning his sexual orientation and prospects for marriage.”

Ranjeet first met the teen when in 2007 at an office in Paya Lebar. There is a gag order in place to protect the identity of the victim.

The accused was then managing PA’s community projects in the south-east/north-west Community Development Council (CDC) and oversaw the south-east CDC’s youth network programme.

In his testimony, the victim shared that he had been excited to join the youth network as it involved modelling.

It was something that he was interested to pursue, in line with his hopes of becoming a singer or actor.

In a subsequent meeting, Ranjeet asked the victim if he was interested in modelling, and told him that he had the potential to do well and that he was interested to work with him.

Seeing that the victim was keen, the accused took down his contact number and later messaged him. He asked him “how far he was willing to go” and whether he had performed oral sex before.

The victim said no, and testified that he was confused at that moment.

Some time later, Ranjeet invited him to his office. The teen said he felt excited and agreed because he thought he might be securing a photoshoot or could be signed up or recruited as a talent.

At that time, he felt Ranjeet’s earlier question of a sexual nature was only a playful one.

At the office, the accused asked the teen if he wanted to get himself into a photoshoot and asked him if he was “adventurous”.

Ranjeet took the teen to a public toilet and made him perform a sexual act on the accused in one of the cubicles.

A week or two later, Ranjeet arranged to meet the victim at Lavender. The victim only agreed because he again thought that an audition or photoshoot was being arranged for him.

The accused instead took him to a hotel and undressed himself and told the boy to follow suit. The victim felt he had to get it “done and over with”.

Ranjeet then made the victim perform a sexual act on him, before sexually penetrating him.

On July 24, 2018, the victim contacted the accused, who had became PA’s head of Youth and Sports in 2017, via Facebook Messenger.

He wanted to meet Ranjeet, to let him know how the acts he had subjected to had destroyed him.

There was an exchange of messages before the accused called and spoke to the victim on the phone, but Ranjeet subsequently blocked the victim on social media.

On May 30, 2020, the victim wrote to Ranjeet’s work e-mail address, where the teen accused him of having manipulated him into engaging in sexual activities at a carpark toilet and in a hotel room.

Ranjeet did not respond. The victim eventually lodged a police report on Aug 24, 2020.

During the trial, the accused, who was represented by Mr Martin De Cruz, denied committing any of the acts but Judge Ng said he had no reservations in believing the victim’s account.

He said the teen’s description from his memory of the incident in the toilet, was sufficiently detailed in particulars and connected in sequence.

Judge Ng also said the victim had no motive to lie and nothing to gain from fabricating untruths against Ranjeet.

He added that the victim could not tell anyone about the abuse as his strong religious upbringing made him fearful.

In sentencing Ranjeet, Judge Ng said it was aggravating that the accused took advantage of a youthful person who was in his late teens to satisfy his lust.

“The acts of the accused and the manner of luring the victim with the promise of a bright future revealed a highly corruptive influence being exerted by the accused to achieve his lascivious aims.

“This is particularly aggravating,” he added.

Ranjeet is appealing against the conviction and sentence.

The Straits Times has reached out to PA for comment.

 

[LITTLEREDDOT]

Senior executive breached confidentiality by downloading thousands of files when he resigned: Court​

The judge said Mr Rajan's explanation for deleting applications from his devices was unsatisfactory.PHOTO: ST FILE

Selina Lum
Mar 14, 2025

SINGAPORE – Around the time he resigned as head of investor relations at a Singapore-based fund management company, a man downloaded thousands of documents from its cloud storage on Google Drive.

Mr Rajan Sunil Kumar was subsequently sued by his former employer, Hayate Partners, for breach of confidentiality by accessing and downloading the documents, and by retaining copies of the documents beyond the termination of his employment.

The files included documents relating to Hayate’s investment strategies; personal identification information and bank account details of clients; meeting minutes and call logs; and personal identification information of the firm’s key personnel.

After he was ordered by the court to hand over his electronic devices for forensic examination by Hayate’s experts, Mr Rajan wiped them clean.

He then argued that his former employer had no evidence to show that he retained the downloaded documents beyond the termination of his employment.

In a judgment released on March 14, a High Court judge said the only reason Hayate did not have such evidence was due to Mr Rajan’s intentional and deliberate acts of deleting the applications on his devices.

Justice Dedar Singh Gill said: “That is akin to a thief deleting the video footage capturing his act of stealing, and then saying that no one can prove that he had stolen something.”

The judge found that Mr Rajan breached his confidentiality obligations by downloading certain documents to his personal MacBook and by retaining the files after the termination of his employment.

But Justice Gill also found that Mr Rajan did not breach confidentiality for other downloads that were made to his Dell work laptop, which was returned to the company upon the termination of his employment.

Justice Gill ordered the cache files that remain in the MacBook to be deleted under the supervision of Hayate or its forensic expert and lawyers.

Hayate’s claim for damages will be assessed at a separate hearing.

The Singapore-incorporated company held a capital markets services licence and mainly managed the Hayate Japan Equity Long-Short Fund.

It was registered with the Monetary Authority of Singapore as a financial institution at the time of the proceedings.

A Straits Times check of its current status shows that a notice of cessation has been lodged.

Mr Rajan, who is 38 this year, was the company’s head of investor relations from Dec 9, 2019 to Dec 22, 2021.

His primary role was to reach out to prospective investors for the purposes of promoting the fund.

During the course of his employment, the company did not provide him with regular payslips.

This increasingly became a bugbear as Mr Rajan, who is from India, needed to submit his payslips to apply for Singapore citizenship.

He eventually tendered his resignation verbally on Dec 8, 2021.

The company conducted an audit of his IT activities as part of its usual protocol when an employee resigns.

In total, Mr Rajan was alleged to have downloaded about 4,800 distinct files from the company’s online cloud storage into his MacBook over three days in 2021, on Dec 8, Dec 20 and Dec 21.

He was alleged to have retained these files after the termination of his employment.

Hayate, represented by Ms Sharon Chong of RHTLaw Asia, sued him in 2022.

The company relied on clauses in his letter of appointment in arguing that he was contractually obliged not to retain confidential information.

Hayate also obtained a court order for Mr Rajan to hand over all devices which were used to download the confidential information so that they could be examined by its forensic experts.

Mr Rajan handed over his MacBook and iPhone after deleting most of the applications from the devices.

Hayate argued that Mr Rajan knew that removing the applications could wipe away crucial metadata and limit the evidence against him recoverable by the forensic experts.

Mr Rajan, represented by Mr Alfred Dodwell, argued that there were no explicit terms in his letter of appointment imposing an obligation on him not to access and download the information for non-work-related purposes.

He accepted that the downloads made on Dec 8 and Dec 21 were into his MacBook, but maintained that the Dec 20 downloads were into the Dell laptop.

Mr Rajan’s explanation for deleting the applications was that he did not know who he was giving away the devices to and that he had started in a new job.

In his judgment, Justice Gill said Mr Rajan’s explanation for the deletions rang hollow and was unsatisfactory.

Regarding the downloads on Dec 8 and Dec 21, the judge concluded that it was more likely than not that Mr Rajan had retained the confidential documents in his personal devices beyond the last day of his employment.

The judge said it was more likely that the Dec 20 downloads were into the Dell laptop, based on the timings of the downloading and syncing between Mr Rajan’s devices and the firm’s servers.

Mr Rajan had asserted that he downloaded Skype chat logs on Dec 21 to use as evidence in lodging complaints to various authorities against Hayate.

But Justice Gill said Mr Rajan had already gathered the necessary proof by taking numerous screenshots of the Skype conversations relating to the issue of his payslips, and there was no need for him to download the entire chat log.

 

[LITTLEREDDOT]

NS defaulter gets 14 weeks’ jail for remaining outside Singapore after exit permit expired​

A panel of three judges rejected the man's claim that he did not know he needed an exit permit to remain in India.PHOTO: ST FILE

Selina Lum
Mar 19, 2025

SINGAPORE - A 28-year-old Singaporean who defaulted on his national service obligations by remaining overseas even after his permit to do so had expired, will have to serve 14 weeks in jail after his appeal against his conviction and sentence was dismissed on March 19.

A High Court panel of three judges rejected the man’s claim that he did not know he needed an exit permit to remain in India for his studies, because his late mother had been handling all the correspondence with the Central Manpower Base (CMPB) until late 2018.

Naresh Kumar Nagesvaran, who was born in Singapore, had left for India with his mother and sister in 2004 when he was seven years old.

The court was told that his Singaporean father had abandoned the family.

In 2009, when he turned 13 years old, a notice was sent to his last-known address in Singapore to inform him of his NS liability. It stated that he had to apply for a valid exit permit if he intended to remain overseas for longer than three months.

Naresh Kumar subsequently obtained exit permits for two consecutive periods, which allowed him to remain outside of Singapore.

The first, which was valid from Jan 30, 2010 to Jan 28, 2012, was applied for online.

The second exit permit was applied for over the counter at the CMPB in Singapore on Jan 3, 2012.

This permit was valid from Jan 29, 2012 to Sept 30, 2013.

He returned to Singapore only on April 7, 2019 – about 5½ years longer than he was allowed – and was arrested at the airport.

He started his national service later that year.

He was then charged over failing to return to Singapore by the period stipulated in the second exit permit.

Naresh Kumar, who was represented by Mr Suresh Damodara, claimed trial to the charge.

There are no earlier cases in law reports for this specific offence under the Enlistment Act.

In previous cases involving NS defaulters, the offenders were typically charged over leaving or remaining outside Singapore without an exit permit to begin with, or over not complying with an order to report for pre-NS procedures or activities.

Naresh Kumar contended that no one told him when he was 13 years old that he had NS obligations in Singapore, or that he had to obtain a valid exit permit to remain in India.

He claimed that he became aware of his NS obligations only in late 2018.

However, the prosecution presented evidence that Naresh Kumar had accompanied his uncle to CMPB on Jan 3, 2012 to apply for the second exit permit.

His travel records showed he was in Singapore from Dec 25, 2011 to Jan 10, 2012 – the period coincided with his application date.

Naresh Kumar insisted that he had remained outside the CMPB premises while his uncle went to the counter.

He also tried to distance himself from a letter that was sent to CMPB on Feb 18, 2014.

The letter, which was signed with his name, sought an extension of his exit permit.

He denied signing the letter and suggested that his name was written in his mother’s handwriting. His mother died in June 2019 after a long battle with cancer.

A legal question that arose in the case was whether the offence was one of strict liability.

A strict liability offence is one where a person would be convicted as long as the prosecution can prove the act was committed, regardless of the person’s intent or knowledge.

In convicting him in 2023, district judge Luke Tan ruled that the offence was of strict liability in nature.

This meant the prosecution did not need to show Naresh Kumar was aware that he had to return to Singapore before his exit permit expired.

In any event, the district judge found that Naresh Kumar knew of his NS obligations as he had accompanied his uncle to CMPB and that he had signed the letter to the CMPB.

On March 19, a panel comprising Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon, Justice Tay Yong Kwang and Justice Vincent Hoong upheld the lower court’s decision.

Chief Justice Menon noted that it was incumbent on the defence to present expert evidence to support its claim that the Feb 18, 2014 letter was signed by someone else.

He added that the defence also did not call Naresh’s uncle to testify about the CMPB visit.

In response to queries, a Mindef spokesperson said that since the High Court set out the sentencing framework for NS defaulters in 2017, 29 defaulters, including Naresh Kumar, have been sentenced to imprisonment.

 

[LITTLEREDDOT]

9 people to be deported from Singapore for illegal touting activities at Changi Airport​

The individuals approached travellers of the same nationality to help transport gold and mobile phones back to their home countries.PHOTO: ST FILE

Sherlyn Sim
Mar 30, 2025

SINGAPORE - Nine foreigners will be deported and barred from re-entering Singapore for illegal touting activities at Changi Airport.

The individuals, aged between 30 and 48, approached travellers of the same nationality to help transport gold and mobile phones back to their home countries.

The travellers were promised a cash reward for handing over the items to counterparts at their destinations, said the police, Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA), Ministry of Manpower (MOM) and Changi Airport Group in a joint statement on March 30.

The genders and nationalities of the nine were not disclosed in the statement, nor when they would be deported.

The foreigners were investigated after a joint operation by the four organisations on March 22.

Eight of them had their work permits or S Passes revoked by MOM, while one had his short-term visit pass cancelled by ICA.

According to the MOM website, work permits are issued to the likes of migrant workers, foreign domestic helpers and performing artistes, while S Passes are issued to skilled workers who earn at least $3,150 a month.

A short-term visit pass is issued at the point of entry to those eligible for entry and short-term stay in Singapore as a tourist, for social visit, or medical treatment, according to the ICA website.

Under the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore Act, those touting in the airport will be issued a Prohibition Order, which prevents them from entering the airport for a period of time unless they are boarding a flight. Those who flout the order can be arrested for criminal trespass.

Foreigners on work passes are allowed to work only in the occupation, and for the employer, as approved for their work pass, the organisations said in the joint statement. They are not allowed to operate or participate in any other business.

Those on short-term visit passes are not allowed to perform any paid and unpaid work in Singapore during their stay here.

“The Singapore authorities would also like to remind travellers to avoid carrying goods on behalf of strangers, as doing so may expose them to security risks, or arrest and prosecution for involvement in illicit activities,” the joint statement said.

In a seperate incident in October 2024, a man was sentenced to six days’ jail for entering Changi Airport despite a ban and for asking a stranger to transport gold.

 

[LITTLEREDDOT]

Man charged after he allegedly caused ruckus during Scoot flight, threatened to kill crew member​

Shaffiq Alkhatib
Apr 01, 2025

SINGAPORE – A man, who allegedly caused a ruckus on board a Singapore-bound Scoot flight from Sydney, Australia, and threatened to kill a male crew member, was charged with criminal intimidation on April 1.

Kolathu James Leo, 42, an Indian national, was also charged with one count each of using criminal force on the flight attendant and being intoxicated on board the plane, jeopardising good order and discipline.

He was said to be drunk during the flight on Feb 27, when he allegedly started shouting.

Kolathu is also accused of attempting to detach a seat pocket and hitting a seat in front of him some time between 11.59am and 12.10pm that day.

He allegedly behaved aggressively when cabin crew tried to calm him down.

He is accused of grabbing the flight attendant’s right wrist some time between 12.35pm and 12.40pm. He is also accused of threatening to kill the man at around 5pm on Feb 27.

Police said in a statement on March 31 that the Indian national became compliant only when he was told that the aircraft would return to Australia if he continued with his behaviour.

A police spokesperson said: “He was then placed under restraints by the cabin crew for the rest of the journey. Upon arrival at Changi Airport, the man was arrested by officers from the Airport Police Division.”

Kolathu is expected to plead guilty on April 22.

If convicted of using criminal force on the crew member, he can be jailed for up to three months and fined up to $1,500.

Offenders convicted of threatening to kill another person can be jailed for up to 10 years and fined.

Those convicted of being intoxicated on board a flight, jeopardising good order and discipline, can be jailed for up to a year and fined up to $20,000.

 

[LITTLEREDDOT]

Jail for man, 73, who molested 4 stewardesses on board SIA flight​

Shaffiq Alkhatib
Apr 02, 2025

SINGAPORE - A 73-year-old man molested four cabin crew members on board a Singapore Airlines flight from San Francisco to Singapore as he found them attractive.

On April 2, retiree Balasubramanian Ramesh was sentenced to nine months’ jail after he pleaded guilty to four molestation charges, each involving one woman.

Three other similar charges involving one of the four victims, whom he molested on four separate occasions, were considered during his sentencing.

The Indian national, who used to work as a manager in a bank in India, had not consumed alcoholic drinks during the flight, the court heard.

Deputy Public Prosecutor Ashley Chin told the court that Balasubramanian was sitting in an aisle seat on board the SIA flight on Nov 18, 2024, when a 25-year-old stewardess pushed a meal cart past him at around 3.30am.

He then touched the woman’s buttock over her clothing.

Shocked by his actions, she quickly walked away, feeling uncomfortable about what had happened, the prosecutor said.


About five minutes later, a second stewardess, 26, was serving a passenger who was seated across the aisle from Balasubramanian when he touched her buttocks.

He struck again at around 9.30am, placing a hand on a 31-year-old stewardess’ upper thigh while she was helping a nearby passenger with the in-flight entertainment system.

At around 5.30pm, he touched the thigh of a 29-year-old stewardess who was helping a passenger prepare for landing.

This fourth victim, who had been warned by her colleagues to approach the accused with caution, confronted Balasubramanian, DPP Chin said.

Balasubramanian denied touching the fourth victim. But she and her male supervisor told him that they were aware that he had touched several of their colleagues inappropriately, and the police would be alerted.

The plane landed at around 6.45pm and the supervisor reported the matter to staff members at the SIA control centre, who alerted the police.

Officers arrested Balasubramanian later that day, and he was charged in court on Nov 25, 2024.

On April 2, DPP Chin urged the court to give Balasubramanian a jail sentence of up to a year and six months, stressing that he had targeted four victims in total.

Saying that her client’s offences did not involve skin-to-skin contact, defence lawyer Rezvana Fairouse pleaded for a shorter sentence.

For each count of molestation, an offender can be jailed for up to three years, fined or caned, or receive any combination of such punishments.

Balasubramanian cannot be caned as he is over 50 years old.

​

 

[aerobwala]