[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] ZAINUBA BINTI ABU BAKAR

[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] ZAINUBA BINTI ABU BAKAR

Prosecution failed to prove the crucial element that the accused induced the complainant to part with RM20,000 by deception because the deception was shown to originate from a third party ('Tuan Haji') and not from the accused; additionally the charge was defective for failing to allege how the accused deceived the complainant and investigative omissions (absence of phone call logs/forensics) left reasonable doubt. Therefore no prima facie case existed and the accused was discharged and released.

Citation
CB-83-27-01/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Parties
Prosecutor: Pendakwa Raya; Accused: Zainuba binti Abu Bakar
Court
Magistrates' Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
15 April 2022
Case Number
CB-83-27-01/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Cheating (section 420 Penal Code) / End of Prosecution Case Accused Discharged Without Being Called to Make Defence
Outcome
Accused discharged and released; prosecution failed to prove a prima facie case under Section 420 Penal Code
Legal Topics
Cheating Under Section 420, Prima Facie Burden, Particulars of Charge, Amendment of Charge, Investigation Deficiencies, Identification and Forensics
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Evidence Procedural Law Investigations Cheating Under Section 420 Prima Facie Burden Particulars of Charge Amendment of Charge +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 7 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Prosecutor

Zainuba binti Abu Bakar

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Cheating (section 420 Penal Code) / End of Prosecution Case Accused Discharged Without Being Called to Make Defence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution proved a prima facie case under Section 420 Penal Code
  2. 2 Whether the accused induced the complainant to deliver property by deception
  3. 3 Whether the deception was perpetrated by the accused or by a third party ('Tuan Haji')

Ratio Decidendi

Prosecution failed to prove the crucial element that the accused induced the complainant to part with RM20,000 by deception because the deception was shown to originate from a third party ('Tuan Haji') and not from the accused; additionally the charge was defective for failing to allege how the accused deceived the complainant and investigative omissions (absence of phone call logs/forensics) left reasonable doubt. Therefore no prima facie case existed and the accused was discharged and released.

Court Disposition

Accused discharged and released; prosecution failed to prove a prima facie case under Section 420 Penal Code

Orders

  • Accused discharged and released