NOR FARAH AIN BINTI SHAHARUDDIN

NOR FARAH AIN BINTI SHAHARUDDIN

Prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused drove in a manner dangerous to the public as required by s.41(1) because of absence of eyewitness/CCTV, delayed and compromised scene preservation, inconsistent investigator testimony and physical evidence inconsistent with the prosecution narrative; however evidence established lack of due care and attention by entering the junction without sufficient care, amounting to an offence under s.43(1) RTA 1987, warranting conviction and a fine.

Citation
AA-83-845-07/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Parties
Prosecution: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR; Accused: NOR FARAH AIN BINTI SHAHARUDDIN
Court
Magistrates' Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
25 March 2025
Case Number
AA-83-845-07/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Procedural Posture
Criminal (road Transport Act 1987) / Magistrate Judgment and Sentencing; Prosecution Filed Appeal to High Court
Outcome
Accused acquitted of s.41(1) RTA 1987; convicted of s.43(1) RTA 1987 (driving without due care and attention)
Legal Topics
Dangerous Driving Causing Death, Careless Driving, Circumstantial Evidence, Causation, Sentencing
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Road Traffic Law Dangerous Driving Causing Death Careless Driving Circumstantial Evidence Causation Sentencing

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

Prosecution

NOR FARAH AIN BINTI SHAHARUDDIN

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal (road Transport Act 1987) / Magistrate Judgment and Sentencing; Prosecution Filed Appeal to High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the prosecution proved dangerous driving under s.41(1) RTA 1987 beyond reasonable doubt
  2. 2 Whether the accused's manner of driving caused the death of the deceased
  3. 3 Whether circumstantial evidence and investigative evidence sufficiently establish guilt

Ratio Decidendi

Prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused drove in a manner dangerous to the public as required by s.41(1) because of absence of eyewitness/CCTV, delayed and compromised scene preservation, inconsistent investigator testimony and physical evidence inconsistent with the prosecution narrative; however evidence established lack of due care and attention by entering the junction without sufficient care, amounting to an offence under s.43(1) RTA 1987, warranting conviction and a fine.

Court Disposition

Accused acquitted of s.41(1) RTA 1987; convicted of s.43(1) RTA 1987 (driving without due care and attention)

Orders

  • Convicted under Section 43(1) Road Transport Act 1987
  • Fine of RM8,500.00; in default of payment one month imprisonment