court of appeal criminal appeal no: q-05-123-2009 between

More documents

Recommendations

Info

4 and for the third appellant, Mohd Ruzaini bin Annuar, Federal Court criminal case no: 05-160-2010(Q)). The factual matrix [6] On that fateful night, the deceased and two of his friends were on their way home after they had their drinks at the wharf at Kampung Hulu. They took a short cut via Kampung Tengah Beladin in order to return home at Kampung Hilir. [7] On arrival at Kampung Tengah Beladin, they were surrounded by the four appellants who were armed with a piece of wood each. The four appellants then chased the deceased and his two friends. The deceased’s two friends managed to reach home safely. [8] But, unfortunately, the deceased could not escape and he was mercilessly beaten by all the four appellants. The first appellant used a piece of wood to hit the back portion of the deceased while the second appellant, a child offender, bashed the deceased’s head with a piece of wood. A short while later, the third and the fourth appellants joined in the affray and they each assaulted the deceased with a piece of wood which they carried separately. Using a piece of wood, the third appellant whacked the back torso of the deceased. The fourth appellant too assaulted the deceased on the same spot with a piece of wood and he too kicked the deceased.
5 [9] Investigations revealed that all the four appellants had consumed alcohol and they were involved in a gang fight and that they were under the impression that the deceased was from a rival gang who had attacked them earlier on. Investigations also revealed that all the four appellants had pursued the deceased and had mercilessly beaten him to death. The pathologist confirmed that the cause of death was due to the blunt force trauma on the deceased’s head. The reasons for the reduced sentences [10] We have deliberated at great length and we have reduced their sentences. We took into consideration the following factors: (a) that the original charge of murder was reduced by the prosecution to a charge of culpable homicide not amounting to murder and on this reduced charge they pleaded guilty (Melvani v. Public Prosecutor [1971] 1 MLJ 137) thereby saving precious time and costs bearing in mind that the prosecution had indicated that they would call approximately 20 witnesses and the defence would call approximately 7 witnesses (see page 9 of the appeal record); (b) that they were all first offenders with clean records (Public Prosecutor v. Jafa bin Daud [1981] 1 MLJ 315);
Page 1 and 2: 1 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MALAYSI
Page 3: 3 19.4.2008 and her Ladyship also o
Page 7 and 8: 7 dated 14.5.2009. The probation re
Page 9 and 10: 9 inference from the surrounding ci
Page 11 and 12: 11 responsible for the resulting ev
Page 13 and 14: 13 [24] It is ideal to recognise th
Page 15 and 16: 15 There his Lordship alluded to re
Page 17 and 18: 17 “Whether a person is a hardene
Page 19 and 20: 19 v. Alcock And Others [1967] Crim
Page 21 and 22: 21 370, [1998] 2 MLJ 181; Fu Foo To
Page 23 and 24: 23 [56] We have considered all the
Page 25 and 26: 25 (10) Dato Mokhtar bin Hashim & A
Page 27: 27 (45) Mohamed Abdullah Ang Swee K

court of appeal criminal appeal no: q-05-123-2009 between

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?