INSP RADHIAH BINTI AHMAD SUSPEK KOK SIONG YIAN

INSP RADHIAH BINTI AHMAD SUSPEK KOK SIONG YIAN

The application for extension of remand was refused because the investigating officer relied on reasons already advanced at the prior remand without explaining why those matters were not addressed during the earlier remand; the police did not demonstrate reasonable diligence or identify witnesses for identification; there was no satisfactory medical evidence establishing grievous hurt for s.326 nor clear nexus for s.506 tied to the accused; administrative tasks did not justify further detention and statutory alternatives (s.118 bonds, s.388 police bail) were available, so the court was not satisfied detention was necessary to prevent interference or absconding.

Citation
JA-89RE-4877-06/2025 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Parties
Applicant (investigating Officer): Inspektor Radhiah Binti Ahmad; Respondent (oyds / Suspect): Kok Siong Yian
Court
Magistrates' Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
22 June 2025
Case Number
JA-89RE-4877-06/2025 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Remand Application Under Section 117 Kanun Tatacara Jenayah / Hearing on Application for Extension of Remand
Outcome
Application for extension of remand refused
Legal Topics
Remand, Investigation Diligence, Police Bail, Identification Parade (kawad Cam), Grievous Hurt / Section 320, Criminal Intimidation (section 506)
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Criminal Procedure Constitutional Law Remand Investigation Diligence Police Bail Identification Parade (kawad Cam) Grievous Hurt / Section 320 +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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Inspektor Radhiah Binti Ahmad

Applicant (investigating Officer)

Kok Siong Yian

Respondent (oyds / Suspect)

Procedural Posture

Criminal Remand Application Under Section 117 Kanun Tatacara Jenayah / Hearing on Application for Extension of Remand

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether extension of remand under s.117 CPC was justified
  2. 2 Whether police had exercised reasonable diligence during prior remand period
  3. 3 Whether medical evidence supported charge under s.326 (grievous hurt) via s.320 definition

Ratio Decidendi

The application for extension of remand was refused because the investigating officer relied on reasons already advanced at the prior remand without explaining why those matters were not addressed during the earlier remand; the police did not demonstrate reasonable diligence or identify witnesses for identification; there was no satisfactory medical evidence establishing grievous hurt for s.326 nor clear nexus for s.506 tied to the accused; administrative tasks did not justify further detention and statutory alternatives (s.118 bonds, s.388 police bail) were available, so the court was not satisfied detention was necessary to prevent interference or absconding.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of remand refused

Orders

  • Application for extension of remand refused
  • Police may continue investigation and may consider using s.118 CPC bonds or s.388 CPC police bail as alternatives