IMTIAZ KHAN

IMTIAZ KHAN

Bail was refused because the accused was charged with a non-bailable offence under s.373 Penal Code and failed to demonstrate exceptional grounds under s.388(1) CPC; the nature and gravity of the offence, the severity of potential punishment, the accused's foreign status with an expiring work visa creating a tangible flight risk, the public interest and likelihood of witness tampering together justified a judicial refusal of bail.

Citation
WA-62-123-08/2024 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Parties
Prosecution: Pendakwa Raya; Accused: Imtiaz Khan
Court
Sessions Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
2 August 2024
Case Number
WA-62-123-08/2024 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Charge Under Penal Code S.373 (suppression of Brothels) / Bail Application at Sessions Court Refused; Appeal to High Court Indicated
Outcome
Bail application rejected
Legal Topics
Bail, Non Bailable Offence, Section 373 Penal Code, Section 388(1) CPC, Risk of Absconding, Witness Tampering, Public Interest
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Criminal Procedure Human Trafficking/public Order Bail Non Bailable Offence Section 373 Penal Code Section 388(1) CPC Risk of Absconding +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Prosecution

Imtiaz Khan

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Charge Under Penal Code S.373 (suppression of Brothels) / Bail Application at Sessions Court Refused; Appeal to High Court Indicated

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether bail should be granted for an accused charged with a non-bailable offence under s.373 Penal Code
  2. 2 Whether the accused's foreign nationality and expiring work visa create a real risk of absconding
  3. 3 Whether exceptional grounds exist to justify bail under s.388(1) CPC

Ratio Decidendi

Bail was refused because the accused was charged with a non-bailable offence under s.373 Penal Code and failed to demonstrate exceptional grounds under s.388(1) CPC; the nature and gravity of the offence, the severity of potential punishment, the accused's foreign status with an expiring work visa creating a tangible flight risk, the public interest and likelihood of witness tampering together justified a judicial refusal of bail.

Court Disposition

Bail application rejected

Orders

  • Accused's application for bail is rejected