She received $500 per customer, then handed it over to him
In Singapore, a High Court this week let stand the conviction of an Indian-origin permanent resident who coerced Bangladeshi migrant women into prostitution at a nightclub, affirming a 16-month sentence and substantial fine. The case, rooted in the quiet desperation of workers far from home and stripped of wages, lays bare how exploitation finds its footing in economic vulnerability. It is a reminder that trafficking is rarely a sudden rupture — it is built, methodically, from withheld pay, false promises, and the weight of distance.
- Two Bangladeshi women, already owed unpaid wages, were cornered into sexual servitude at a Singapore nightclub — one was struck across the face when she refused.
- The operation ran on deliberate control: wages withheld, salaries denied, and compliance extracted as a condition of keeping any employment at all.
- In February 2016, the women fled the club and reported the abuse to Singapore's Manpower Ministry, triggering an investigation that brought both men to court.
- On appeal, the court split its judgment — reducing the business partner's sentence and acquitting him of one charge, while leaving the primary offender's 16-month term entirely intact.
- The ruling signals Singapore's resolve to prosecute trafficking networks embedded in its service economy, even as the case exposes how little protection migrant workers hold when far from home.
A Singapore High Court this week upheld the conviction of Arumaikannu Sasikumar, a 46-year-old Indian-origin permanent resident, affirming his 16-month prison sentence and a fine exceeding $8,100 for forcing women into prostitution. His business partner, 60-year-old Singaporean citizen Rajendran Nagarethinam, had his sentence reduced on appeal from 30 months to 19, though he remains imprisoned for offences connected to their establishment, the Kollywood club.
The case traces back to two Bangladeshi women who came to Singapore in 2015 and 2016 seeking work. Both were coerced into providing sexual services to customers. One, already owed unpaid wages and economically cornered, reluctantly agreed — handing over the $500 she received per customer directly to Sasikumar. The other refused, and Sasikumar struck her across the face. The women were not simply pressured; they were trapped by a system that withheld their salaries and made compliance a condition of continued employment.
In February 2016, the two women, along with two colleagues, escaped and filed a complaint with Singapore's Manpower Ministry, detailing both the wage theft and the forced sexual labor. The report set off an investigation that ultimately led to charges against both men for prostitution-related offences and obstruction of justice.
On appeal, the High Court drew a distinction between the two defendants — acquitting Rajendran on one charge and reducing his sentences on others, while finding no grounds to disturb Sasikumar's original judgment. The outcome affirms Singapore's willingness to prosecute those who exploit migrant workers, even as it illuminates how such networks quietly take root within the city-state's service economy, preying on people with few protections and nowhere near enough recourse.
A Singapore High Court decision this week affirmed the conviction and 16-month prison sentence of Arumaikannu Sasikumar, a 46-year-old Indian-origin permanent resident, along with a fine exceeding $8,100 for his role in forcing women into prostitution. His business partner, Rajendran Nagarethinam, 60, a Singaporean citizen, saw his own sentence reduced on appeal from 30 months to 19 months, though he remains imprisoned for related offences at their establishment, the Kollywood club.
The case centers on the exploitation of two Bangladeshi women who arrived in Singapore in 2015 and 2016, seeking work and income. Both were coerced into providing sexual services to customers at the club. One woman, desperate over unpaid wages, reluctantly agreed to the arrangement; for each customer she serviced, she received $500, which she then handed over to Sasikumar. The other woman refused. When she declined, Sasikumar struck her across the face.
The mechanics of the operation reveal a deliberate system of control. Sasikumar and Rajendran, sometimes assisted by a Bangladeshi man named Roky, would approach the women and demand they solicit customers. The women were trapped not only by coercion but by economic desperation—they had not been paid their regular salaries and were being forced to "go out" with clients as a condition of their employment. Their wages were withheld. Their labor was unpaid.
In February 2016, the two Bangladeshi women, along with two others working at the club, fled. They reported their situation to Singapore's Manpower Ministry, detailing the wage theft and the forced sexual labor. The complaint triggered an investigation that eventually led to charges against both men for prostitution-related offences and for obstructing the course of justice.
On Wednesday's appeal, the High Court took differing views of the two defendants. Rajendran was acquitted of one charge entirely, and the court found grounds to reduce his sentences on two others—a recognition, perhaps, of some distinction in his culpability compared to Sasikumar's. But for Sasikumar, the court saw no reason to disturb the original judgment. His 16-month term and the $11,000 fine stand. The court's decision underscores Singapore's commitment to prosecuting those who traffic vulnerable migrant workers into sexual servitude, even as it reveals how such networks operate within the city-state's service economy, exploiting workers far from home with few protections and little recourse.
Citas Notables
When the other Bangladeshi woman refused for prostitution, Arumaikannu slapped her— Court record, as reported by The Straits Times
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why does a case like this matter beyond the individuals involved?
Because it shows how trafficking networks operate in plain sight—inside a nightclub, with regular customers, using wage theft and isolation as the primary tools of control. It's not hidden in basements. It's a business model.
The women were from Bangladesh. Why were they particularly vulnerable?
They arrived alone, far from family, needing income urgently. They had no networks, no knowledge of local labor law, and employers knew they couldn't easily report abuse without risking their visa status or deportation. That vulnerability is the whole point of the operation.
One woman agreed reluctantly because of unpaid wages. That's a form of debt bondage, isn't it?
Exactly. She wasn't choosing prostitution freely—she was choosing between starvation and sexual labor. The men created the desperation, then offered the only escape they controlled. That's coercion, even if she said yes.
What does the court's different treatment of the two men suggest?
That intent and degree of involvement matter legally. Rajendran got some reduction; Sasikumar didn't. The court may have seen Sasikumar as the architect, the one making the direct demands and using violence. That distinction shapes the sentence.
The woman who was slapped—what happens to her now?
The court record doesn't say. She's likely still in Singapore or has returned to Bangladesh. The criminal case is about punishing the men, not about repairing what was done to her. That's the gap in the system.