KHATIJAH BINTI MHD SALLEH

KHATIJAH BINTI MHD SALLEH

The accused was discharged because the prosecution failed to adduce a prima facie case: the charge was impermissibly duplicitous by conflating distinct modes ('melulu' and 'membahayakan'), there was no eyewitness evidence, essential physical evidence (tyre/skid marks) was not forensically attributed to the accused's vehicle, and autopsy reports lacked satisfactory, consistent identification of the deceased; these defects collectively meant the elements of s.41(1) RTA 1987 were not proved beyond reasonable doubt.

Citation
JH-86-1-04/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Parties
Prosecution: PENDAKWA RAYA; Accused: KHATIJAH BINTI MHD SALLEH
Court
Magistrates' Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
6 February 2023
Case Number
JH-86-1-04/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Road Traffic Offence (section 41(1) Road Transport Act 1987) / Pre Trial/committal Stage No Case to Answer (accused Discharged and Released)
Outcome
Accused discharged and released (no case to answer); accused relieved from facing trial on the charges
Legal Topics
Dangerous Driving Causing Death, Duplicitous Charge, Identification of Deceased, Circumstantial Evidence, Forensic Tyre/skid Mark Evidence, Autopsy Procedure and Identification
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Road Traffic Law Evidence Law Forensic Evidence Dangerous Driving Causing Death Duplicitous Charge Identification of Deceased Circumstantial Evidence +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 5 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PENDAKWA RAYA

Prosecution

KHATIJAH BINTI MHD SALLEH

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Road Traffic Offence (section 41(1) Road Transport Act 1987) / Pre Trial/committal Stage No Case to Answer (accused Discharged and Released)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused drove the vehicle dangerously or recklessly causing two deaths under s.41(1) RTA 1987
  2. 2 Whether the charge is duplicitous for combining 'melulu' and 'membahayakan' in one count
  3. 3 Whether prosecution proved identity of deceased conclusively

Ratio Decidendi

The accused was discharged because the prosecution failed to adduce a prima facie case: the charge was impermissibly duplicitous by conflating distinct modes ('melulu' and 'membahayakan'), there was no eyewitness evidence, essential physical evidence (tyre/skid marks) was not forensically attributed to the accused's vehicle, and autopsy reports lacked satisfactory, consistent identification of the deceased; these defects collectively meant the elements of s.41(1) RTA 1987 were not proved beyond reasonable doubt.

Court Disposition

Accused discharged and released (no case to answer); accused relieved from facing trial on the charges

Orders

  • Tertuduh dilepaskan dan dibebaskan tanpa dipanggil untuk membela diri (no case to answer)
  • Case closed against the accused