SALMI BINTI A. RAHMAN

SALMI BINTI A. RAHMAN

High Court found a serious misdirection by way of non-direction because the trial judge failed to evaluate and consider the defence evidence as required by s182A(1) CPC; accordingly the appeals were allowed and all convictions and sentences quashed; prosecution's cross-appeal on sentence dismissed.

Citation
BL-42S-3-01/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/perayu: Salmi binti A. Rahman; Respondent/prosecution: Pendakwa Raya
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
23 June 2023
Case Number
BL-42S-3-01/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / High Court Decision on Appeal
Outcome
Appeals by appellant allowed; convictions and sentences set aside; prosecution's appeal on sentence dismissed.
Legal Topics
Human Trafficking Under ATIPSOM, Assault Causing Grievous Hurt (penal Code), Unlawful Employment of Migrant Worker (immigration Act), Judicial Duty to Consider Defence Under S182 a CPC, Misdirection and Appellate Intervention
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Trafficking in Persons Immigration Law Evidence Criminal Procedure Appeals Human Trafficking Under ATIPSOM Assault Causing Grievous Hurt (penal Code) +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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Salmi binti A. Rahman

Appellant/perayu

Pendakwa Raya

Respondent/prosecution

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / High Court Decision on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge failed to evaluate and consider the defence as required by s182A(1) Criminal Procedure Code
  2. 2 Whether convictions under ATIPSOM, Penal Code (amended to s325) and Immigration Act were safe
  3. 3 Whether amendment of charge from s326 to s325 was appropriate

Ratio Decidendi

High Court found a serious misdirection by way of non-direction because the trial judge failed to evaluate and consider the defence evidence as required by s182A(1) CPC; accordingly the appeals were allowed and all convictions and sentences quashed; prosecution's cross-appeal on sentence dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeals by appellant allowed; convictions and sentences set aside; prosecution's appeal on sentence dismissed.

Orders

  • Allow appeals BL-42S-1-01/2022, BL-42S-3-01/2022, BL-41S-1-01/2022 and BL-42H(A)-1-01/2022
  • Quash convictions and set aside all sentences imposed by the Sessions Court