Provision shop owner who raped 11-year-old gets more than 14 years' jail

Straits Times

4 days ago

Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox
The judge rejected Ramalingam's requests to remove his electronic tag and to forgo regular check-ins with the police.
SINGAPORE - A provision shop owner gave a free drink to an 11-year-old girl who visited his store and, when she returned later that day to buy ice cream, he sexually assaulted her twice.
On July 30, Ramalingam Selvasekaran, 58, was sentenced to 14 years, three months and two weeks' jail by the High Court.
As he cannot be caned given that he is above the age of 50, the sentence includes additional jail time in lieu of 15 strokes of the cane.
The Indian national was found guilty of all three charges against him on July 7 – one count of rape and two counts of outrage of modesty – after a trial in which he represented himself.
During sentencing arguments on July 30, Ramalingam maintained his innocence and said he would be appealing against his conviction.
After he was sentenced and granted bail of $80,000 pending appeal, he bargained with the judge regarding his bail conditions.
Justice Aidan Xu rejected Ramalingam's requests to remove his electronic tag and to forgo regular check-ins at the Police Cantonment Complex.
Top stories
Swipe. Select. Stay informed.
Singapore MHA to support HSA's crackdown on Kpod abusers and help in treatment of offenders: Shanmugam
Business S'pore's economic resilience will face headwinds in second half of 2025 from tariffs, trade conflicts: MAS
Business S'pore's Q2 total employment rises, but infocomm and professional services sectors see more job cuts
Singapore Fewer than 1 in 5 people noticed suspicious items during MHA's social experiments
Asia Powerful 8.8-magnitude quake in Russia's far east causes tsunami; Japan, Hawaii order evacuations
Singapore Migrant workers who gave kickbacks to renew work passes were conservancy workers at AMK Town Council
Asia Japan, Vietnam, EU contest terms of US tariff deals behind the scenes
Singapore Escape, discover, connect: Where new memories are made
Ramalingam also objected to Deputy Public Prosecutor Susanna Yim's proposal to return to the girl $8 in cash that was among the various trial exhibits.
'The $8 was taken from my shop,' he said. The judge told the prosecution to look into the matter.
The offences took place between about 4.50pm and about 5.05pm on Oct 28, 2021, at his store in Jurong West.
Ramalingam, who was 55 years old at the time of the offences, was accused by the prosecution of leading the girl to the inner confines of his shop to touch her and make her perform oral sex on him.
Following the assaults, the girl sought help from a passer-by, who called the police.
At the end of the trial, which began on Jan 16, Ramalingam argued that the girl's testimony should not be believed.
He said it was unbelievable that she would have gone to a stranger for help, when she could have gone to someone she knew.
He argued that it was suspicious that there was no police camera footage of her returning to her home after the incident.
He added that he could not have raped the victim as he was suffering from erectile dysfunction, and noted that his DNA was not found on her body.
In convicting Ramalingam on July 7, Justice Xu said the prosecution's case has been established beyond a reasonable doubt.
The judge found no significant weaknesses in the girl's recounting of the events.
'The fact that she had not run off after the first act of molest, or that she did not resist the assaults, or inform her grandfather, were all to my mind sufficiently explained, particularly given that she was still young and immature,' he said.
Justice Xu pointed out that in Ramalingam's earlier statements to the police, he stated he had hugged and kissed the victim and that she had performed oral sex on him.
Ramalingam's later statements denying the commission of the offences were merely an attempt to resile from what he had admitted, the judge said.
Justice Xu said the absence of camera footage did not undermine her evidence.
While there was no dispute that Ramalingam suffered from erectile dysfunction, the judge said the prosecution's expert witness gave a cogent explanation that oral rape remained possible.
The absence of Ramalingam's DNA on the victim was at most neutral, and did not undermine the girl's evidence that she had been sexually assaulted, said the judge.