Charges have been dropped against a mainland mother who served two months in jail for offences she says immigration officers bullied her into admitting. Yau Wing-mei, 32, may take legal action against the Immigration Department after the planned retrial in Western Court collapsed yesterday. A Court of First Instance judge in May ordered a retrial after Ms Yau produced new evidence in support of her appeal against convictions for misleading an immigration officer with false information and transferring a travel document to another person without reasonable excuse. She had admitted the offences at her original trial in Western Court and received a three-month jail term on March 14, of which she served two months. Yesterday, the prosecution told Magistrate Peter White that the charges against Ms Yau had been dropped because of inconclusive evidence. Ms Yau, the mother of a six-month-old girl, said after the hearing that she was relieved the charges had been withdrawn. She said of her jail ordeal: 'The experience was horrifying. Even the thought of it makes me scared.' At her appeal hearing on May 17, she told Mr Justice Thomas Gall that she sneaked into the SAR on December 16 when she was eight months' pregnant and turned herself in to the Immigration Department the next day. She said officials produced 'from nowhere' a two-way entry permit made on the mainland, which showed that she was in Hong Kong between September 28 and December 15. The permit bore her name and details but a photograph of another woman, she said. She told the court that officers forced her to admit that she sold the document to another person, who travelled out of Hong Kong on December 15 last year. A department spokesman said last night that Ms Yau had admitted the offence under caution. In the absence of any evidence contradicting her cautioned statement, she was prosecuted after giving birth on February 17. At the appeal, Ms Yau produced documents, including medical records dated in November, to show she was in Shenzhen at the time. Mr Justice Gall ordered the retrial because of this. The department spokesman said Ms Yau had full recourse to complaint channels to pursue any alleged misconduct. In fact, her husband, driver Kwok Kwong-ning, 42, complained to the Ombudsman, who found the case to be undetermined. On examination of new evidence that emerged, the department concluded it was no longer appropriate to pursue the case. Mr Kwok said their daughter, Tin-wai, was taken into prison with his wife and released only after her birth certificate was issued at the end of March. Ho Hei-wah, the director of concern group the Society for Community Organisation, said the department owed an explanation. 'Dropping the charges [against Ms Yau] isn't enough,' he said. 'The department has a responsibility to explain to the public what actually happened.' Mr Ho said Ms Yau should be allowed to remain in the SAR until the department had conducted an inquiry into the incident. Law Yuk-kai, director of Human Rights Monitor, said the department should review its internal operations and compensate Ms Yau for wrongful imprisonment. 'The department shouldn't wait for Ms Yau to take the initiative to sue for damages. They should make an apology before she does so,' he said. Mr Law urged the department to review its institutional procedures in order to prevent similar cases from happening. 'Otherwise, there will be severe damage to the department's reputation.'