KAMINI A/P ELANGOVAN

KAMINI A/P ELANGOVAN

The court held that the guilty plea was validly and unequivocally recorded in compliance with Section 173(b) KPJ and supporting authorities; therefore the conviction is lawful and must be upheld. The appeal is competent only against sentence under Section 305 KPJ; the imposed sentence of a RM1000 fine (default one month imprisonment) is within statutory limits under Section 29(1) Akta Kesalahan Kecil 1955 and was appropriately assessed by balancing mitigating factors (first offender, plea, family dependants) against aggravating factors (loss RM1,480, prevalence of offence, need for deterrence). Consequently the conviction and sentence were affirmed.

Citation
JA-83-1689-06/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Parties
Prosecutor/respondent: Pendakwa Raya; Accused/appellant: Kamini a/p Elangovan
Court
Magistrates' Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
26 June 2022
Case Number
JA-83-1689-06/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence (high Court Review of Magistrate's Conviction and Sentence)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed
Legal Topics
Minor Offences Act 1955 Section 29(1), Plea of Guilty Recording (section 173 Kpj), Appeal Scope (section 305 Kpj), Sentencing Principles, Judicial Notice, General and Specific Deterrence
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Sentencing Criminal Procedure Minor Offences Act 1955 Section 29(1) Plea of Guilty Recording (section 173 Kpj) Appeal Scope (section 305 Kpj) Sentencing Principles Judicial Notice +1 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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Prosecutor/respondent

Kamini a/p Elangovan

Accused/appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence (high Court Review of Magistrate's Conviction and Sentence)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the guilty plea was validly and properly recorded in compliance with Section 173(b) KPJ
  2. 2 Whether the conviction is sustainable
  3. 3 Whether the sentence imposed was lawful and appropriate and within judicial discretion

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the guilty plea was validly and unequivocally recorded in compliance with Section 173(b) KPJ and supporting authorities; therefore the conviction is lawful and must be upheld. The appeal is competent only against sentence under Section 305 KPJ; the imposed sentence of a RM1000 fine (default one month imprisonment) is within statutory limits under Section 29(1) Akta Kesalahan Kecil 1955 and was appropriately assessed by balancing mitigating factors (first offender, plea, family dependants) against aggravating factors (loss RM1,480, prevalence of offence, need for deterrence). Consequently the conviction and sentence were affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed

Orders

  • Conviction under Section 29(1) Akta Kesalahan Kecil 1955 affirmed
  • Sentence affirmed: fine RM1000, in default one (1) month imprisonment