He was found to have been a victim of child abuse by his conservative parents Azlin binte Arujunah and Ridzuan bin Mega Abdul Rahman for months leading up to his death.
[1] Born in January 2011 to his conservative parents Ridzuan bin Mega Abdul Rahman and Azlin binte Arujunah, the boy, who was the youngest of the couple's six children, was adopted by Azlin's close friend Zufarina bte Abdul Hamid in March 2011 because the couple were unable to take care of him given their unemployment.
Between 15 and 17 October 2016, Azlin allegedly grabbed the boy by his ankle to prevent him from running away, then poured boiling hot water over both his right leg and hand, and over his arm and chest.
On another occasion, Azlin once again splashed hot water on him, and the boy, in a moment of anger, shouted at his mother in Malay, "kau gila ke apa?
After the scalding, the boy crouched down in the toilet, and Ridzuan continued to pour hot water over his back and calf before stopping.
While nothing is known about his father, Ridzuan grew up without his mother, who often faced legal problems with the authorities for drug related offences, and instead, his maternal aunt Kasmah binte Latiff would be the one to care for him.
His grandmother considered him crazy and his uncles felt he was difficult to understand due to him being quick in his speech and his sentences did not flow.
When he grew older, if his aunt refused him money, Ridzuan would hit her, punch the wall, raise his voice or throw things.
Her father was a drug addict and had spent time in prison, and her mother neglected her, which led to Azlin leaving her parents at age 4 or 5 to live with her grandparents.
Her paternal uncle and aunt both took care of her, and Azlin shared a close bond with her grandmother, who was the only one who showed her compassion and love.
Ridzuan bin Mega Abdul Rahman was first arrested on 26 October 2016, and charged with voluntarily causing grievous hurt by using hot water to scald the boy.
[13] In the first few days of the trial in November 2019, the pathologist and other medical experts gave evidence regarding the cause of death and severity of the burns found on the boy.
[14][17][18] During the cross-examination of the medical experts, the defence lawyers sought to cast doubts that their clients caused the fatal injury.
Azlin's defence counsel questioned Dr Chan if the boy would be able to run around the living room had the earlier scald injuries been severe.
For this, when questioned by DPP Tan, Dr Chan testified that after she examined the victim's lungs, there were indeed signs of pneumonia, but the traces were minimal and patchy, and could not have contributed to his death.
Dr Ung opined that Ridzuan was experiencing an abnormality of the mind as these psychiatric disorders, which originated from his childhood, affected his mental faculties.
[28] On 3 April 2020, in midst of the trial, Justice Valerie Thean found that the prosecution had insufficient evidence to specifically prove the alleged common intention by the couple to inflict on their son injuries that were sufficient in the ordinary cause of nature to cause death, which is an essential element to prove the mens rea of the murder charges proceeded against Azlin and Ridzuan.
Hence, she decided to acquit the couple of murder and asked the prosecution to file alternative charges in relation to the fatal scalding incidents undergone by the boy.
In light of the judge's decision to dismiss the murder charges, the prosecution decided to bring up fresh charges of voluntarily causing grievous hurt by dangerous means, for which the crime warrants the maximum penalty of life imprisonment, or alternatively up to 15 years' imprisonment, in addition to a fine or caning up to 24 lashes.
The couple additionally pleaded guilty to the other charges of child abuse and hurt, which came under the Children and Young Persons Act (CYPA).
As for Ridzuan's lawyer Eugene Thuraisingam, he asked for his client to receive 15 years' and five months' imprisonment and 12 strokes of the cane since he indeed played a smaller role than Azlin and had faced several life difficulties that spurred him into committing the offences, while Azlin's lawyer Thangavelu argued for at least 16 years' imprisonment in view of the sympathetic circumstances of her life, marriage and background.
Justice Thean found that life imprisonment was not appropriate because the medical evidence could not determine which injuries arose from which incidents, and that despite not qualifying for diminished responsibility, Azlin's adjustment disorder and Ridzuan's low IQ prevented them from realising the full consequences of their actions.
She also considered that Azlin should not deserve a heavier sentence than Ridzuan as there was a common, joint responsibility that the couple shared with each other equally in inflicting the child abuse.
Other than that, the judge also made note of the seriousness of the couple's crimes, stating that their arguments to downplay their culpability with their domestic and financial difficulties were a mockery of the facts.
Senior Counsel Goh Yihan, dean of the Singapore Management University's Yong Pung How School of Law, and DPP Mohamed Faizal bin Mohamed Abdul Kadir (who prosecuted convicted maid abuser Gaiyathiri Murugayan for abusing and killing her maid) also joined the prosecution (completely replaced by Senthilkumaran Sabapathy and Norine Tan) to argue on their behalf.
Ng added that should Azlin fully intended to cause death when inflicting the scald injuries, she would definitely deserve life imprisonment, but the evidence proved otherwise.
Thuraisingam commented that Ridzuan showed remorse and admitted his responsibility from the start, and his young age should be a mitigating factor in his sentence.
They found that among all the aggravating circumstances, Ridzuan had abused his son, who was a defenceless five-year-old boy, in a particularly cruel and inhumane manner over a prolonged period of time and the child was burnt extensively over his entire body, including his face and genital area.
Mahathir stated that ever since the end of the appeal process, he felt that justice had been served for the little boy and the parents were given their due punishments for the child's murder.
[49] In 2023, Singaporean Tamil-language crime show Theerpugal (translated as "The Verdict" in Tamil) re-enacted the five-year-old boy's abuse and murder.