Mohd Aman Bin Mustapa [Polis Diraja Malaysia (PDRM)]

Mohd Aman Bin Mustapa [Polis Diraja Malaysia (PDRM)]

The High Court upheld the s.385 conviction because the prosecution proved the appellant, a police officer, intentionally put the complainants in fear (threat of exposure and referral to Pejabat Agama) to dishonestly obtain money (RM300) and his conduct and surrounding circumstances corroborated the charge; the rape charge was unsafe due to lack of proof of penetration and absence of unusually convincing testimony; the sentence was increased from 3 to 5 years because the appellant abused his police position and public interest required harsher punishment.

Citation
AB-41S(A)-6-12/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant / Perayu: Mohd Aman Bin Mustapa; Respondent / DPP: Pendakwa Raya (Public Prosecutor)
Court
A
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
5 June 2025
Case Number
AB-41S(A)-6-12/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (rayu an Jenayah) / Appellate Judgment (high Court Appeal Disposed)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed in respect of conviction under s.385 Penal Code; appeal against acquittal under s.376(2)(f) dismissed; sentence varied and increased.
Legal Topics
Extortion (s.385 Penal Code), Rape (s.376(2)(f) Penal Code), Corroboration in Sexual Offences, Credibility of Witnesses, Conduct Evidence (s.8 Evidence Act 1950), Sentencing Principles
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Evidence Law Sentencing Police Discipline/abuse of Power Extortion (s.385 Penal Code) Rape (s.376(2)(f) Penal Code) Corroboration in Sexual Offences Credibility of Witnesses +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 6 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohd Aman Bin Mustapa

Appellant / Perayu

Pendakwa Raya (Public Prosecutor)

Respondent / DPP

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (rayu an Jenayah) / Appellate Judgment (high Court Appeal Disposed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution proved putting a person in fear to commit extortion under s.385 Penal Code
  2. 2 Whether rape (penetration) under s.376(2)(f) was proved beyond reasonable doubt
  3. 3 Whether trial judge properly evaluated defence evidence (maximum evaluation)

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court upheld the s.385 conviction because the prosecution proved the appellant, a police officer, intentionally put the complainants in fear (threat of exposure and referral to Pejabat Agama) to dishonestly obtain money (RM300) and his conduct and surrounding circumstances corroborated the charge; the rape charge was unsafe due to lack of proof of penetration and absence of unusually convincing testimony; the sentence was increased from 3 to 5 years because the appellant abused his police position and public interest required harsher punishment.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed in respect of conviction under s.385 Penal Code; appeal against acquittal under s.376(2)(f) dismissed; sentence varied and increased.

Orders

  • Conviction under section 385 Penal Code affirmed
  • Acquittal under section 376(2)(f) Penal Code affirmed