[ ] 1. ) THIRUMURUGAN A/L MUTIAH 2. ) VASANTHAN A/L VEERAMOHAN 3. ) THURAIRAJU A/L GANESON 4. ) RAGU VELAN A/L MASANAM 5. ) LOGESWARAN A/L MANICKAM

[ ] 1. ) THIRUMURUGAN A/L MUTIAH 2. ) VASANTHAN A/L VEERAMOHAN 3. ) THURAIRAJU A/L GANESON 4. ) RAGU VELAN A/L MASANAM 5. ) LOGESWARAN A/L MANICKAM

Maximum evaluation of prosecution evidence shows failure to prove essential ingredients of the offence (other than identity of deceased): time/place of death per amended charge not established; eyewitness evidence is inconsistent and uncorroborated; no forensic/DNA linkage to accused; circumstantial evidence not irresistible to infer mens rea or common intention. Consequently no prima facie case — accused discharged and acquitted.

Citation
BA-45B-34-10/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Prosecution: Pendakwa Raya; Accused: Thirumurugan a/l Mutiah; Accused: Vasanthan a/l Veeramohan; Accused: Thurairaju a/l Ganeson; Accused: Ragu Velan a/l Masanam; Accused: Logeswaran a/l Manickam
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
20 May 2025
Case Number
BA-45B-34-10/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Murder (section 302 Kanun Keseksaan) / End of Prosecution Case; Defendants Discharged (acquitted) Not Called to Enter Defence
Outcome
All five accused (OKT1–OKT5) discharged and acquitted; prosecution failed to establish prima facie case
Legal Topics
Murder (section 302), Common Intention (section 34), Prima Facie Test at Close of Prosecution Case, Forensic Pathology and Cause/time of Death, DNA Evidence Admissibility and Probative Value, Reliability of Eyewitness Testimony, Amendment of Charge
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Forensic Evidence Evidence and Procedure Murder (section 302) Common Intention (section 34) Prima Facie Test at Close of Prosecution Case Forensic Pathology and Cause/time of Death DNA Evidence Admissibility and Probative Value +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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Prosecution

Thirumurugan a/l Mutiah

Accused

Vasanthan a/l Veeramohan

Accused

Thurairaju a/l Ganeson

Accused

Ragu Velan a/l Masanam

Accused

Logeswaran a/l Manickam

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Murder (section 302 Kanun Keseksaan) / End of Prosecution Case; Defendants Discharged (acquitted) Not Called to Enter Defence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution proved all elements of murder under ss.299,300 and 302 read with s.34
  2. 2 Whether time and place of death as set out in the amended charge was established
  3. 3 Whether forensic evidence and DNA linked the accused to the killing

Ratio Decidendi

Maximum evaluation of prosecution evidence shows failure to prove essential ingredients of the offence (other than identity of deceased): time/place of death per amended charge not established; eyewitness evidence is inconsistent and uncorroborated; no forensic/DNA linkage to accused; circumstantial evidence not irresistible to infer mens rea or common intention. Consequently no prima facie case — accused discharged and acquitted.

Court Disposition

All five accused (OKT1–OKT5) discharged and acquitted; prosecution failed to establish prima facie case

Orders

  • Accused Thirumurugan a/l Mutiah (OKT1), Vasanthan a/l Veeramohan (OKT2), Thurairaju a/l Ganeson (OKT3), Ragu Velan a/l Masanam (OKT4) and Logeswaran a/l Manickam (OKT5) are released and acquitted
  • Accused are not called upon to enter their defence