A Singapore High Court judge has dismissed a bus driver’s appeal against his conviction for driving without due care and attention, causing the death of a 61-year-old pedestrian at a signalised crossing.
In grounds issued on October 14, Judge of the Appellate Division See Kee Oon upheld Low Man Hong’s conviction under section 65(1)(a) of the Road Traffic Act 1961. Low had been sentenced to six months’ imprisonment and disqualified from driving for eight years from his release, but appealed against his conviction only.
The collision occurred shortly before 10.26pm on June 20, 2022, when Low was driving a double-decker bus for Tower Transit Singapore along Ang Mo Kio Avenue 1 towards Boundary Road.
The bus had stopped at a red traffic light before the junction with Ang Mo Kio Avenue 3. When the lights turned green, Low began turning left as the pedestrian signal also showed a green man.
At the same time, a 61-year-old woman began crossing at the signalised pedestrian crossing. Low failed to notice her, and the front-left portion of the bus struck her. He continued driving without realising what had happened, dragging her beneath the bus for about 82.2 metres before she became separated from the vehicle near the junction of Ang Mo Kio Avenue 3 and Ang Mo Kio Street 21.
The woman was pronounced dead at 10.40pm.
The central issue at trial was whether Low had exercised due care and attention while turning through the crossing. He argued that he had followed his training by checking the pedestrian crossing, scanning the left side of the bus, leaning forward to check blind spots and looking through the side and rear-view mirrors.
The District Court rejected his evidence, finding that he had checked only at the beginning of the turn before proceeding in one continuous movement without visibly slowing or stopping. The district judge found that he had failed to maintain a proper lookout and had not stopped to give way to the pedestrian.
On appeal, Low challenged the assessment of the in-vehicle camera footage and argued that the law did not require him to repeatedly lean forward or sideways to check the same blind spots. He maintained that his checks gave him a reasonably comprehensive view of the road.
See Kee Oon JAD rejected the arguments, holding that drivers must take adequate steps to compensate for obstructions to their view. The bus’s left A-pillar and front-left door structure created known blind spots, and Low was required to adjust his position and re-check the area as the bus approached the pedestrian crossing.
The judge said the duty to maintain a proper lookout included checking blind spots, particularly where a driver’s view was obstructed. A pedestrian’s right to free and uninterrupted passage across a controlled crossing could not depend on whether the driver had actually noticed the pedestrian.
The judge also rejected Low’s argument that the prosecution had failed to call additional witnesses to establish the standard of care expected of a reasonable bus driver. The relevant statutory provisions were sufficient to establish the applicable requirements.
Under rule 4 of the Road Traffic (Pedestrian Crossings) Rules, a driver turning at a junction with a pedestrian crossing must stop to give way to a pedestrian who is crossing or starting to cross. The judge agreed that this obligation was not conditional on the driver subjectively noticing the pedestrian.
See Kee Oon JAD found that Low had not shown that the district judge’s findings were plainly wrong or against the weight of the evidence. He dismissed the appeal and affirmed the conviction.
Justin Ng Cho Yang and Andrew Ho Juan Yao of Kalco Law LLC represented Low. Grace Chua and Kenneth Ng appeared for the prosecution.
This is an unofficial case summary prepared by LexBru for informational and educational purposes only. It has not been reviewed, approved or endorsed by the Singapore Courts. Please refer to the full judgment https://www.elitigation.sg/gd/s/2026_SGHC_214 published on the Singapore Courts website for the Court’s full grounds of decision.