NORAZIZUL BIN M YOUSOF

NORAZIZUL BIN M YOUSOF

The court accepted the accused's voluntary guilty pleas, held the date error in the second charge to be a curable non-prejudicial defect, found each offence constituted a separate transaction against different victims and therefore consecutive sentences were appropriate, and imposed one year imprisonment per count consecutively plus one stroke of whipping per count to run consecutively.

Citation
MC-83-375-06/2025 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Parties
Prosecutor: Public Prosecutor; Accused: Norazizul bin Myousof
Court
Magistrates' Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
4 June 2025
Case Number
MC-83-375-06/2025 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Procedural Posture
Criminal (cheating Under Section 420 Penal Code) / Sentencing in Magistrates' Court; Appeals Lodged to High Court
Outcome
Accused convicted on three counts under section 420 Penal Code and sentenced.
Legal Topics
Cheating (section 420 Pc), Plea of Guilty Procedures, Defective Charge/date Error and Curative Provisions, Concurrent Vs Consecutive Sentencing, Whipping Sentence Discretion, Totality Principle, Modus Operandi and Pattern Offences
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Sentencing Criminal Procedure Evidence Cheating (section 420 Pc) Plea of Guilty Procedures Defective Charge/date Error and Curative Provisions Concurrent Vs Consecutive Sentencing +3 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 6 Authorities cited 31 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Public Prosecutor

Prosecutor

Norazizul bin Myousof

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal (cheating Under Section 420 Penal Code) / Sentencing in Magistrates' Court; Appeals Lodged to High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether guilty pleas were valid and voluntary
  2. 2 Whether a clerical/date error in the second charge was material or curable
  3. 3 Whether the three offences arose from one transaction or separate transactions for sentencing purposes

Ratio Decidendi

The court accepted the accused's voluntary guilty pleas, held the date error in the second charge to be a curable non-prejudicial defect, found each offence constituted a separate transaction against different victims and therefore consecutive sentences were appropriate, and imposed one year imprisonment per count consecutively plus one stroke of whipping per count to run consecutively.

Court Disposition

Accused convicted on three counts under section 420 Penal Code and sentenced.

Orders

  • First charge (MC-83-374-06/2025): One year imprisonment from date of conviction and one stroke of whipping.
  • Second charge (MC-83-375-06/2025): One year imprisonment to commence after completion of sentence in MC-83-374-06/2025 and one stroke of whipping.