axl
Well-Known Member
Careful... for you might still be caught for "drunk driving"! Wow... how archaic a law this is. 
Full article background is in today's ST, but can't find it online... so have to make do with: Chong Pit Khai v Public Prosecutor
"8 The appellant’s account of how he came to be arrested and charged was as follows. He was a full-time national serviceman, and had returned home from camp on the night in question. He alleged that he had bought a few alcoholic drinks from a nearby 7-Eleven store which he later consumed in his father’s car whilst listening to some music. He had not driven the car but had merely slept in it with the car engine turned off. The car was parked in a parking lot alongside a road. He further alleged that he had pleaded guilty to the s 68 charge because he thought that the offence was a minor one and he did not want the trouble of a trial which would require him to commute between his camp and the court.
9 The appellant’s account would suggest that he had not driven the car while under the influence of alcohol and this was consistent with what he had stated in his statement made under s 122(6) of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 1985 Rev Ed) which he had made in the course of police investigations before he was charged. The s 122(6) statement was as follows:
I didn’t know it was a chargeable offense to be sleeping in a car under the influence of alcohol. I wouldn’t have do [sic] that if I knew earlier. Moreover the engine was off and the car was parked properly in my private apartment’s parking lot."
PropT care to offer any insight?
Full article background is in today's ST, but can't find it online... so have to make do with: Chong Pit Khai v Public Prosecutor
"8 The appellant’s account of how he came to be arrested and charged was as follows. He was a full-time national serviceman, and had returned home from camp on the night in question. He alleged that he had bought a few alcoholic drinks from a nearby 7-Eleven store which he later consumed in his father’s car whilst listening to some music. He had not driven the car but had merely slept in it with the car engine turned off. The car was parked in a parking lot alongside a road. He further alleged that he had pleaded guilty to the s 68 charge because he thought that the offence was a minor one and he did not want the trouble of a trial which would require him to commute between his camp and the court.
9 The appellant’s account would suggest that he had not driven the car while under the influence of alcohol and this was consistent with what he had stated in his statement made under s 122(6) of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 1985 Rev Ed) which he had made in the course of police investigations before he was charged. The s 122(6) statement was as follows:
I didn’t know it was a chargeable offense to be sleeping in a car under the influence of alcohol. I wouldn’t have do [sic] that if I knew earlier. Moreover the engine was off and the car was parked properly in my private apartment’s parking lot."
PropT care to offer any insight?