He sexually abused them over several years from 2014, offering them gifts such as a second-hand PlayStation or game credits.

The man pleaded guilty in September to three counts of sexual penetration of a minor, with another 18 charges considered in sentencing.

The offender worked part-time, providing religious and Arabic language home tuition on top of delivering food from 2013.

The Islamic Religious Council of Singapore (MUIS) has said that the man was a “self claimed” religious teacher and has never been registered under the Asatizah Recognition Scheme (ARS).

He was also not authorised to perform any form of religious instruction or guidance in Singapore, MUIS said.

The offender continued his sexual crimes on one victim even after realising in February 2019 that he had contracted the HIV from an adult partner.

The man was caught by chance in June 2019 when police officers on patrol did a spot check after noticing the offender with some young boys drinking alcohol near Changi Beach.

The man was diagnosed with paedophilia disorder and assessed to be at a moderate to high risk of recidivism, given his “history of sexual deviancy, easy access to and grooming of multiple victims for sex”.

The prosecution sought 24 years and eight strokes of the cane, while the defence sought 16 to 18 years’ jail.

Vinit Chhabra said his client was physically frail and HIV-positive, and thus caning was not suitable.

At the previous hearing, the judge had asked both sides to make submissions on whether a sentencing framework was needed for the charges.

On Tuesday, Deputy Public Prosecutor Stephanie Koh, who handled the case with Zhou Yang, explained why the prosecution would be declining to provide a framework.

She explained that the charge brought against the offender under Section 376A (2) of the Penal Code was before the 2019 amendments to the law.

Before the 2019 amendments, a charge could be brought under that section, whether the victim consented or not.

Post-amendment, Section 376A (2) now applies only to cases where the victim consents.

“Non-consensual offences will have to be prosecuted under Section 376 instead, said Koh.

Based on the complexities this would introduce in sentencing, the prosecution declined to provide a framework, and the judge agreed with this decision.

Defence lawyer Chhabra argued against points raised by the prosecution on abuse of trust – he said that it cannot be that there is a “blanket” rule for cases where offenders are older than young victims that there is an abuse of trust.

Koh disagreed and pointed out the age difference as well as the behaviour akin to an older brother displayed by the offender – such as lending the victims money or giving them gifts.

The prosecution had argued earlier that the offender’s “irresponsible sexual behaviour presented a real risk of exposing the victims to sexually transmitted diseases”.

The first victim tested positive for HIV at the age of 16 in July 2019, after having sexual interactions with the offender.

“While it cannot be concluded that the accused transmitted the disease to the first victim, it is nevertheless a tragic example of the risks of unprotected sex which the accused exposed his young victims to,” said the prosecution.

Justice Pang Khang Chau said the offender’s HIV status should be accorded little weight, as the defence said he stopped having sexual contact with the first victim when he learned he was HIV-positive.

He said the issue of whether the offender is fit to be caned is a matter to be decided by the prison authorities.

If necessary, the issue will be referred back to court for a decision.