Muhamad Khairuldin Bin Shahrun

Muhamad Khairuldin Bin Shahrun

Court upheld conviction because eyewitness identification by victims was reliable on the facts (close proximity, duration, prior acquaintance, adapted night vision), inconsistencies over weapon form and failure to produce the parang were not fatal, defects in the identification parade did not render dock identification unsafe, the FIR only initiated investigation and language issues did not undermine in‑court testimony, and failure to call the out‑of‑country witness did not demonstrate deliberate concealment to invoke s114(g).

Citation
BA-42S-18-09/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant / Perayu: Muhamad Khairuldin bin Shahrun; Respondent / Public Prosecutor: Pendakwa Raya
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
16 August 2024
Case Number
BA-42S-18-09/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / High Court Appeal Against Sessions Court Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed
Legal Topics
Robbery, Use of Weapon, Identification Evidence, Alibi, Adverse Inference, Documentary Evidence (fir)
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Evidence Robbery Use of Weapon Identification Evidence Alibi Adverse Inference Documentary Evidence (fir)

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 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Muhamad Khairuldin bin Shahrun

Appellant / Perayu

Pendakwa Raya

Respondent / Public Prosecutor

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / High Court Appeal Against Sessions Court Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether absence of the alleged parang (weapon) and inconsistencies in witness sketches fatally undermine prosecution case
  2. 2 Whether defects in the identification parade (kawad cam) and subsequent dock identification render identification unreliable
  3. 3 Whether first information report and its language issues render it inadmissible or unusable as corroboration

Ratio Decidendi

Court upheld conviction because eyewitness identification by victims was reliable on the facts (close proximity, duration, prior acquaintance, adapted night vision), inconsistencies over weapon form and failure to produce the parang were not fatal, defects in the identification parade did not render dock identification unsafe, the FIR only initiated investigation and language issues did not undermine in‑court testimony, and failure to call the out‑of‑country witness did not demonstrate deliberate concealment to invoke s114(g).

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Convictions under section 392 read with section 397 Kanun Keseksaan upheld