DALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA (BIDANG KUASA ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

26 [53] The pertinent circumstantial evidence to be considered in the context of this appeal would be: (a) the evidence of Sergeant Muhamad Zain bin Bardan (SP13) – the retired police officer, who testified that it was his duty to monitor the movements of firearms and ammunition on 4.10.2007 at Dang Wangi police station. According to SP13, the records showed that firearm bearing serial number 031096 was issued in the name of the appellant and the appellant took custody and possession of the firearm on 4.10.2007 and he did not return it. And at the time of his arrest, the same firearm bearing serial number 031096 – the Styer pistol, was found in the Proton GEN-2 motorcar. (b) the “Arms In and Out Register” marked as exhibit “P35” as seen at pages 90 to 104 of the appeal record at Jilid 2 showed that the Styer pistol (exhibit “P23”) was handed to the appellant on 4.10.2007 at 3.55 p.m. together with 30 rounds of 9mm ammunition. It must be borne in mind that approximately 30 to 45 minutes after the robbery at the goldsmith’s shop where SP10 was shot, SP15 and SP16 arrested the appellant while driving the Proton GEN-2 motorcar. At the police station, SP15 found the Styer pistol (exhibit “P23”) underneath the seat cover of the
27 driver’s seat of the Proton GEN-2 containing 12 rounds of 9mm ammunition. (c) ASP Nurdin bin Udin (SP12), the armanent officer, test fired the Styer pistol (exhibit “P23”) using 3 out of the 12 mm ammunition and he found both the Styer pistol (exhibit “P23”) and the ammunition to be serviceable. (d) When SP16 was being cross-examined, it transpired that the appellant admitted as to the ownership of the Styer pistol (exhibit “P23”). Under cross-examination, this was what SP16 testified (see page 123 of the appeal record at Jilid 1): “S: Sebelum OKT dan seorang lagi dibawa ke Balai Polis Kuala Pilah, OKT ada beritahu ‘Tuan, pistol saya ada di atas seat bawah lapik’. J: Ada.” (e) This piece of incriminating evidence is admissible because it surfaced during the cross-examination of the appellant by the appellant’s own counsel. And this point was settled by the Federal Court in the case of Law Tim Wah v Public Prosecutor [1978] 1 MLJ 167, when Lee Hun Hoe CJ (Borneo) speaking for the Federal Court at page 168 said: “It was alleged that the learned judge admitted and took into consideration inadmissible and highly prejudicial evidence resulting in a miscarriage of justice. This matter must be carefully examined. It is proper to bear in mind that we are not dealing with a jury trial or with a direction to a jury, but with a
Page 1 and 2: 1 DALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA (B
Page 3 and 4: 3 iaitu sepucuk pistol telah menyeb
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: 25 advice of Suffian LP in Jayarama
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

DALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA (BIDANG KUASA ...

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

Delete template?

Save as template?