DALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA (BIDANG KUASA ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Introduction 2 ABDUL MALIK BIN ISHAK, JCA DELIVERING THE JUDGMENT OF THE COURT [1] Mazlan bin Othman – the appellant herein, faced two charges. The first charge was under section 3 of the Firearms (Increased Penalties) Act 1971 and that first charge was worded as follows: “Bahawa kamu pada 9.10.2007 lebih kurang jam 3.15 petang di kedai emas Banbau, No. 29, Jalan Dato’ Undang Johol dalam Daerah Kuala Pilah di dalam negeri, Negeri Sembilan Darul Khusus telah melakukan sesuatu kesalahan berjadual iaitu rompakan dan pada masa melakukan rompakan telah melepaskan tembakan dari senjata api jenis Styer No. 03096 dengan niat hendak menyebabkan kecederaan kepada Chin Yuen Choon (KP. No:830120-05-5229) yang demikian kamu telah melakukan satu kesalahan di bawah Seksyen 3 Akta Senjata Api (Penalti Lebih Berat) 1971 dan boleh dihukum di bawah seksyen yang sama.” [2] The second charge against the appellant was for an offence under section 392 of the Penal Code read with section 397 of the same Code and read with section 34 of the the same Code. Under the second charge, the appellant was charged with someone else who has since died and evidence was led to show that his name was Zulkifli bin Ali and the second charge was worded as follows: “Bahawa kamu bersama-sama dengan seorang yang telah meninggal dunia pada 9.10.2007 lebih kurang jam 3.15 petang di kedai emas Banbau, No. 29, Jalan Dato’ Undang Johol dalam Daerah Kuala Pilah di dalam negeri, Negeri Sembilan Darul Khusus dengan niat bersama telah melakukan rompakan dan pada ketika melakukan perbuatan merompak tersebut, kamu telah menggunakan senjata berbahaya
3 iaitu sepucuk pistol telah menyebabkan kecederaan serius kepada Chin Yuen Choon. Oleh yang demikian kamu telah melakukan satu kesalahan (di bawah) Seksyen 392 Kanun Keseksaan dibaca bersama-sama dengan Seksyen 397 Kanun Keseksaan seterusnya dibaca dengan Seksyen 34 Kanun Keseksaan.” [3] After a full trial before the learned Judicial Commissioner (“JC”) of the High Court, the appellant was found guilty for both charges and he was convicted and sentenced to death for the first charge and five (5) years’ imprisonment and two (2) strokes of the cane for the second charge. [4] Aggrieved, the appellant now appeals to this Court. The facts of the case [5] The narration of the facts of the case will be based on the evidence adduced by the prosecution. On 9.10.2007 at 3.15 p.m. while Chin Fei Fun (SP7) was standing in front of the showcase of the goldsmith’s shop known as Kedai Emas Banbau at Kuala Pilah owned by his younger sibling by the name of Chin Yuen Choon (SP10), SP7 saw a motorcycle ridden by two male persons stopped in front of the said shop. SP7 saw that the two male persons wore face masks, black jackets and crash helmets and alighted from the motorcycle and entered the said shop. SP7 described the two male persons vividly in this way. One was small sized and thin and the other was big sized and slightly taller. One of them carried a hammer.
Page 1: 1 DALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA (B
Page 5 and 6: 5 10.10.2007. Exhibit “P9” was
Page 7 and 8: 7 robbery and he circulated that in
Page 9 and 10: 9 downwards. When the driver of the
Page 11 and 12: 11 pistol which was located underne
Page 13 and 14: 13 (e) one red and blue coloured ba
Page 15 and 16: 15 motorcar was stopped, SP15 told
Page 17 and 18: 17 [32] The appellant testified tha
Page 19 and 20: 19 said, “Haizat, tolong aku ni p
Page 21 and 22: 21 S : Kamu tidak pernah berjumpa O
Page 23 and 24: 23 irresistible inference that the
Page 25 and 26: 25 advice of Suffian LP in Jayarama
Page 27 and 28: 27 driver’s seat of the Proton GE
Page 29 and 30: 29 CPC for the government chemist t
Page 31 and 32: 31 GEN-2 motorcar had just been use
Page 33 and 34: 33 “Finding dalam P6 ini adalah d
Page 35 and 36: 35 Pilah-Seremban road some 15 kilo
Page 37 and 38: 37 [66] Learned defence counsel was
Page 39 and 40: 39 [74] The strength of the prosecu
Page 41 and 42: 41 these assumptions are mere specu
Page 43 and 44: 43 [86] It was also submitted by le
Page 45 and 46: 45 [91] So, at least ten (10) days
Page 47 and 48: 47 [94] The sum total of it all wou
Page 49 and 50: 49 ini telahpun disangkal seawal ya
Page 51 and 52: 51 findings of fact arrived at by t
Page 53 and 54:
Rebuttal evidence 53 [108] The appe
Page 55 and 56:
55 legal basis for the reception of
Page 57 and 58:
57 from the same Styer pistol (exhi
Page 59 and 60:
Counsel 59 (1) For the Appellant Ac
show all

DALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA (BIDANG KUASA ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?