\n<\/p>\n
SINGAPORE: A woman who molested a female server at a nightclub was fined S$2,500 (US$1,950) by a court on Thursday (Oct 29).<\/p>\n
The victim, whose identity is protected by a gag order, turned up in court to ask for additional compensation, saying she had lost her job as a result of the incident.<\/p>\n
Sonik Archana Susheel, a 32-year-old Indian national, pleaded guilty to one count of molestation.<\/p>\n
The court heard that Sonik went to a popular nightspot to meet a friend at around 11pm on Mar 13.<\/p>\n
CNA is not naming the club as doing so could lead to the victim’s identification.<\/p>\n
Sonik had consumed alcohol at home and continued drinking at the club.<\/p>\n
After midnight on Mar 14, Sonik was dancing alone when the victim and two of her colleagues walked through the area.<\/p>\n
The victim was a “bottle girl”, a waitress who specialises in delivering entire bottles of liquor to tables.<\/p>\n
She almost collided with Sonik, who was dancing erratically.<\/p>\n
Sonik then touched the victim’s buttocks and pushed her stomach area before showing her the middle finger.<\/p>\n
The victim turned to Sonik and uttered an expletive.<\/p>\n
She was distressed by the incident and sought assistance from the bouncers. Her superiors told her to rest in the kitchen and later reported the incident to the police.<\/p>\n
Sonik was arrested that same day.<\/p>\n
Deputy Public Prosecutor Yohanes Ng sought a fine of S$2,500 for her.<\/p>\n
Defence lawyer Ariffin Sha from Shehzhadee Law said the prosecution’s position was fair.<\/p>\n
He said his client had no prior convictions and had voluntarily paid compensation of S$1,500 to the victim.<\/p>\n
“Her actions were entirely out of character,” he said. “They were not for the purposes of sexual gratification.”<\/p>\n
The victim attended the court hearing and was asked to come forward.<\/p>\n
She confirmed that she had received voluntary compensation of S$1,500 from Sonik, but said she wanted to make a claim for additional compensation.<\/p>\n
“As a result of this case, I was subsequently fired from the job,” she said, guessing that it was because of the trouble it caused.<\/p>\n
She said she was removed from her work group chat a week after the incident and removed from all her “schedules” in the next month.<\/p>\n
She lost about six months of income, which amounted to about S$18,000.<\/p>\n
“Because of the mental distress that I faced, I subsequently left the whole industry as a whole,” said the woman. “Because of this, I actually lost a fair bit of income that’s actually helping me sustain my school fees and allowance.”<\/p>\n
When asked what amount she was seeking, the woman said she was not sure and asked the court for guidance on what a fair amount would be.<\/p>\n
When Sonik heard the amount, she covered her mouth with her hands in the dock.<\/p>\n
Mr Ariffin said the S$1,500 already paid was for the emotional harm suffered by the victim.<\/p>\n
“In respect of the victim’s claim for losses arising from the loss of her job, I do have a lot of sympathy for the victim,” he said.<\/p>\n
“That being said, it’s unclear how, there’s no clear link between the offence and the loss of the job, and I don’t think the compensation order is the appropriate forum for … recovering damages of this nature,” said the lawyer.<\/p>\n
Principal District Judge Lee Lit Cheng said there was insufficient evidence for the court to determine the proper compensation amount, if any, to be ordered.<\/p>\n
She said this would be more appropriately dealt with in a different forum. As voluntary compensation had already been made, she declined to make any compensation order.<\/p>\n
For outrage of modesty, the offender could have been jailed for up to three years, fined, or both. She cannot be caned as she is a woman.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
\n