PENDAKWARAYA PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 1. MOHD RUZAINI BIN SAMINGAN (I/C NO. : XXXXXX-XX-XXXX) 2. ROSZAIMI BIN ROSLAN (I/C NO. : XXXXXX-XX-XXXX)

PENDAKWARAYA PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 1. MOHD RUZAINI BIN SAMINGAN (I/C NO. : XXXXXX-XX-XXXX) 2. ROSZAIMI BIN ROSLAN (I/C NO. : XXXXXX-XX-XXXX)

The application under section 51 CPC was dismissed because the defence failed to satisfy the mandatory prerequisites for production: relevancy and specificity were not demonstrated to the requisite degree in the course of trial and, critically, there was no evidence before the Court on the necessity and desirability of producing the Batu Pahat Report 024281/16; additionally the prosecution did not intend to rely on the document and police investigatory material may be privileged, therefore the exercise of discretion to order production was inappropriate.

Citation
JB-45A-8-04/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Prosecutor: Public Prosecutor; Accused: Mohd Ruzaini bin Samingan; Accused: Roszaimi bin Roslan
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
16 March 2021
Case Number
JB-45A-8-04/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Trial (application for Documents Under Section 51 Cpc)
Outcome
Application disallowed
Legal Topics
Production of Documents, Section 51 Criminal Procedure Code, Police Reports Vs Police Statements, Privilege of Police Investigation Documents, Disclosure Obligations of Prosecution
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Procedure Evidence Drugs Law Production of Documents Section 51 Criminal Procedure Code Police Reports Vs Police Statements Privilege of Police Investigation Documents Disclosure Obligations of Prosecution

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 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Public Prosecutor

Prosecutor

Mohd Ruzaini bin Samingan

Accused

Roszaimi bin Roslan

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Trial (application for Documents Under Section 51 Cpc)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Batu Pahat Report 024281/16 (police report under s.107 CPC) must be produced to the defence under s.51 CPC
  2. 2 Whether police reports/statements made during investigation (s.112) are privileged and exempt from inspection
  3. 3 What are the prerequisites for an order under s.51 CPC (relevancy, specificity, possession, necessity and desirability)

Ratio Decidendi

The application under section 51 CPC was dismissed because the defence failed to satisfy the mandatory prerequisites for production: relevancy and specificity were not demonstrated to the requisite degree in the course of trial and, critically, there was no evidence before the Court on the necessity and desirability of producing the Batu Pahat Report 024281/16; additionally the prosecution did not intend to rely on the document and police investigatory material may be privileged, therefore the exercise of discretion to order production was inappropriate.

Court Disposition

Application disallowed

Orders

  • Application for production of Batu Pahat Report 024281/16 under section 51 Criminal Procedure Code is dismissed