SINGAPORE — What began as a dispute over time and S$400 escalated into a police call, a halted public bus service and a four-day jail sentence for a 28-year-old woman who falsely accused her bus-driver boyfriend of theft and assault.
Tang Pei Si, whose name has been transliterated from Chinese-language reports, pleaded guilty on Aug. 21 to making a false police report after a confrontation involving her 60-year-old boyfriend, a bus captain working from Hougang Bus Interchange. She was sentenced to four days in jail.
The case attracted attention not simply because of the couple’s age difference, but because what started as a private relationship dispute spilled directly into Singapore’s public transport system and triggered an unnecessary police response.
Dispute Started Before His Shift
According to court details reported by Shin Min Daily News and subsequently carried by Stomp and Mothership, Tang and her boyfriend had been together for about 10 years at the time of the incident.
Her boyfriend worked as a bus driver at Hougang Bus Interchange and reportedly commuted from Malaysia to Singapore by motorcycle for work.
When scheduled for afternoon shifts, he would sometimes bring lunch for Tang, who was experiencing financial difficulties, and spend time eating with her at the interchange.
On Oct. 6, 2024, Tang arrived at the interchange at around 2pm expecting to meet him for lunch.
Because it was raining, he arrived at approximately 2.25pm.
After giving Tang her food, the driver prepared to begin work. Tang, however, was unhappy that he was leaving so soon and reportedly pulled at his uniform in an attempt to prevent him from going.
He eventually pushed her hands away and left to start his shift.
But that was not the couple’s only disagreement that day.
S$400 Became Part of the Argument
Before the incident, Tang had returned S$400 that she had previously borrowed from her boyfriend.
She later asked him to give the money back, reportedly because she wanted to use it to buy clothes and shoes.
He refused.
That dispute, combined with Tang’s anger over what she regarded as him not spending enough time with her, would soon follow the bus captain onto his route.
At about 2.43pm, Tang boarded bus service 112, which her boyfriend was driving.
She sat near the front of the bus while he continued working and did not engage with her.
According to the reports, Tang became increasingly upset.
Then she called the police.
The Accusation That Stopped the Bus
Tang falsely told police that the bus captain had stolen S$400 from her and assaulted her. She also claimed that he had twisted her left arm.
Because the allegation involved an apparent offence and the person she accused was at that moment driving a public bus, police responded.
The bus captain was forced to stop the vehicle and suspend the service while officers investigated.
Three passengers who were on board had to leave the bus and transfer to another service.
The consequences extended beyond the inconvenience to commuters.
Prosecutors told the court that four police officers were dispatched, while the allegation also placed the bus captain at risk of being arrested during his working shift.
Tang later admitted during police investigations that the accusations were false and that she had made the report because of the personal dispute with her boyfriend.
Prosecutors Wanted a Longer Jail Term
The prosecution sought between one and two weeks’ imprisonment, pointing to the disruption caused to public transport, affected passengers and police resources.
The judge acknowledged that Tang had been truthful when officers eventually arrived and investigated the complaint.
But the court also stressed that knowingly making a false allegation was serious because it caused authorities to act on something that had never happened.
Tang ultimately received four days’ jail.
Under Section 182 of Singapore’s Penal Code, knowingly giving false information to a public servant with the intention—or knowledge that it is likely—to cause that public servant to exercise lawful powers to another person’s injury or annoyance can carry a penalty of up to two years’ imprisonment, a fine, or both.
Couple Reportedly Reconciled
Despite the criminal case, Tang’s lawyer told the court that the couple had reconciled.
Her boyfriend even attended court to support her, according to the Stomp report.
The defence also said Tang was an only child and the sole breadwinner of her family. She had since found work as a cashier and was trying to rebuild stability in her life.
The reconciliation, however, did not erase the wider consequences of the false report.
A personal argument had pulled police officers away from other duties, interrupted a working bus captain’s route and forced passengers to change buses.
That became the central issue before the court: once an invented allegation is presented to police as a genuine emergency, what began as a private dispute can quickly become a public one.
Leave a Reply