HARJINDER SINGH A/L SAUDAGAR SINGH TIMBALAN

HARJINDER SINGH A/L SAUDAGAR SINGH TIMBALAN

Count 1 (RM4,000) — acquitted: prosecution failed to prove receipt by accused beyond reasonable doubt; independent corroboration insufficient and possibility that money was for OCS could not be excluded. Counts 2 (RM500) and 3 (RM2,000) — convicted: credible direct evidence (SP1, SP3, SP12), supported by intercepted recordings and controlled trap, established receipt and that sums were demanded/accepted as reward to refrain from action; accused failed to rebut s50 presumption on balance of probabilities. Sentencing: imprisonment and fines imposed as deterrent and to protect integrity of public service, with reduction in term from statutory maximum given long service and mitigating...

Citation
JA-61R-13-09/2017 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Parties
Prosecution: PENDAKWA RAYA; Accused / Appellant: HARJINDER SINGH A/L SAUDAGAR SINGH
Court
Sessions Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
11 May 2021
Case Number
JA-61R-13-09/2017 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Anti‑corruption (asprm 2009) / Trial Judgment and Sentence (appeal Pending)
Outcome
Accused acquitted on Charge 1 (RM4,000); convicted and sentenced on Charge 2 (RM500) and Charge 3 (RM2,000). Execution of sentence suspended pending appeal.
Legal Topics
Bribery (accepting Gratification), Section 17 ASPRM 2009, Presumption Under Section 50 ASPRM 2009, Entrapment / Trap Operations, Sentencing Principles
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Anti‑corruption Law Evidence Law Bribery (accepting Gratification) Section 17 ASPRM 2009 Presumption Under Section 50 ASPRM 2009 Entrapment / Trap Operations Sentencing Principles

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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PENDAKWA RAYA

Prosecution

HARJINDER SINGH A/L SAUDAGAR SINGH

Accused / Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Anti‑corruption (asprm 2009) / Trial Judgment and Sentence (appeal Pending)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused, a police sergeant, corruptly accepted gratification contrary to s17 ASPRM 2009 on three specified dates
  2. 2 Whether prosecution proved the elements of the offence beyond reasonable doubt for each charge
  3. 3 Whether the accused rebutted the statutory presumption under s50 ASPRM 2009

Ratio Decidendi

Count 1 (RM4,000) — acquitted: prosecution failed to prove receipt by accused beyond reasonable doubt; independent corroboration insufficient and possibility that money was for OCS could not be excluded. Counts 2 (RM500) and 3 (RM2,000) — convicted: credible direct evidence (SP1, SP3, SP12), supported by intercepted recordings and controlled trap, established receipt and that sums were demanded/accepted as reward to refrain from action; accused failed to rebut s50 presumption on balance of probabilities. Sentencing: imprisonment and fines imposed as deterrent and to protect integrity of public service, with reduction in term from statutory maximum given long service and mitigating...

Court Disposition

Accused acquitted on Charge 1 (RM4,000); convicted and sentenced on Charge 2 (RM500) and Charge 3 (RM2,000). Execution of sentence suspended pending appeal.

Orders

  • Charge 1 (26/06/2015, RM4,000) — accused acquitted and discharged
  • Charge 2 (17/07/2015, RM500) — convicted under s17 ASPRM 2009; imprisonment 3 months from date of conviction and fine RM10,000, failing which 6 months imprisonment