MOHD ISMAIL BIN ISHAK

MOHD ISMAIL BIN ISHAK

Prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case under s.354 because the complainant's evidence was not unusually convincing, there was no independent corroborative evidence connecting the accused to the offence, the complainant's conduct and long delay in reporting undermined credibility, and the court would not be prepared to convict if the accused remained silent; therefore the accused must be acquitted at the close of the prosecution's case under s.173(f) CPC.

Citation
JA-82JS-1-08/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Parties
Prosecution: Pendakwa Raya; Accused: Mohd Ismail bin Ishak
Court
Magistrates' Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
5 August 2025
Case Number
JA-82JS-1-08/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Close of Prosecution Case (decision on Prima Facie Case)
Outcome
Accused acquitted and discharged at close of prosecution case
Legal Topics
Section 354 Penal Code, Prima Facie Test, Corroboration, Delay in Reporting, Section 173 Criminal Procedure Code, Recall of Witness (s.425 Cpc)
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Criminal Procedure Section 354 Penal Code Prima Facie Test Corroboration Delay in Reporting Section 173 Criminal Procedure Code +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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Prosecution

Mohd Ismail bin Ishak

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Close of Prosecution Case (decision on Prima Facie Case)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the prosecution established a prima facie case under s.354 Penal Code at the close of its case
  2. 2 Whether the complainant's evidence was 'unusually convincing' to dispense with corroboration
  3. 3 Whether independent corroborative evidence existed to implicate the accused

Ratio Decidendi

Prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case under s.354 because the complainant's evidence was not unusually convincing, there was no independent corroborative evidence connecting the accused to the offence, the complainant's conduct and long delay in reporting undermined credibility, and the court would not be prepared to convict if the accused remained silent; therefore the accused must be acquitted at the close of the prosecution's case under s.173(f) CPC.

Court Disposition

Accused acquitted and discharged at close of prosecution case

Orders

  • Accused acquitted and discharged without being called to make a defence
  • Bail deposit of RM4,000 returned to the surety