A Singapore Family Court has dismissed a woman’s application for a personal protection order (PPO) against her husband, ruling that his messages about having thoughts of killing her did not amount to emotional or psychological abuse.
The woman was also ordered to pay S$1,500 in costs to her husband.
Magistrate Yvette Tay issued the grounds of decision on 19 August 2026.
The couple, who married on 6 December 2023, became estranged in October 2024 and have not lived together since 1 October that year. They had no interaction or communication from January 2025 onwards.
The court found that the husband had not committed family violence against his wife in any of the five incidents she raised in her PPO application.
Wife Raised Five Alleged Family Violence Incidents
The woman alleged four incidents involving emotional or psychological abuse and one involving physical abuse between May 2024 and January 2025.
The court heard that the couple had an argument on 30 September 2024, during which the wife hit her husband. He was injured, left their home the next day, blocked her, and later obtained a PPO against her with her consent on 1 November 2024.
One incident raised by the wife involved an argument in May or June 2024.
She alleged that her husband hit her with his hands. However, the court found that she had been walking around, shouting that he was lying, getting very close to him and becoming hysterical during the argument.
The judgment said the husband had hit her arms out of possible frustration in an attempt to make her stop. The court noted that she did not suffer bruises or injuries and did not seek medical attention.
Court Examined Messages About “Fantasising” About Killing Wife
The court also considered two Telegram messages sent by the husband in late December 2024 and January 2025.
On 29 December 2024, the husband wrote that he was still in an unstable state of mind but also recalled good times in their relationship. He said he often felt angry and offended, and accused her of having changed.
He then wrote that before leaving the home, he had repeatedly fantasised about killing her and thought about different methods he could use.
The wife said the messages caused her fear.
On 1 January 2025, after she asked him not to ignore her, he replied that he felt better after distancing himself from her for almost three months.
He added that thoughts of wanting to kill her were returning strongly after more frequent interactions, and that he did not want to talk too much because he felt she was bad for his mental health.
However, Magistrate Tay found that the messages were not threats.
The court described them as an “over-honest and misguided” explanation of why the husband did not want further communication, rather than an attempt to frighten or control his wife.
Court Found Wife Did Not Appear Fearful
The magistrate also considered the wife’s response after receiving the messages.
About 20 minutes after the 1 January message, she sent a lengthy reply saying she still wanted to talk and remain connected. She suggested couples counselling, said they should work on their marriage, and asked whether he would still visit for Chinese New Year as her family expected him.
She also sent intimate photos of herself.
The court said these actions suggested that she was not fearful of her husband and did not appear to show signs of emotional or mental distress caused by his messages.
The court found there was a low likelihood of future family violence because the couple were no longer living together or communicating.
The husband told the court he was unwilling to engage with her further.
Wife Ordered To Pay S$1,500 Costs
The husband’s lawyer sought S$5,000 in costs.
The court instead ordered the wife to pay S$1,500.
