ABDUL KARIM BIN ABDUL AZIZ

ABDUL KARIM BIN ABDUL AZIZ

Applying a maximum evaluation the court found the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case under s.509: the complainant's late police report lacked adequate explanation; the internal written complaint (Exhibit D4/D4A) did not allege sexual harassment; prosecution failed to call material witnesses who allegedly received earlier reports; these gaps and permissible inferences favored the accused, therefore the accused was discharged and released without being called to enter his defence.

Citation
JA-82-4-01/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Parties
Prosecution: Public Prosecutor; Accused: Abdul Karim bin Abdul Aziz
Court
Magistrates' Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
3 December 2023
Case Number
JA-82-4-01/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Summary (magistrates' Court) / Close of Prosecution Prima Facie Stage (decision to Discharge)
Outcome
Accused Abdul Karim bin Abdul Aziz discharged and released at the close of the prosecution; accused not called to enter defence (discharged under s.173 CPC principles).
Legal Topics
Section 509 Penal Code (insulting Modesty), Prima Facie Test / S.173 CPC, Corroboration in Sexual Offence Cases, Prosecutorial Discretion to Call Witnesses, Delay in Reporting / Late Complaint
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Evidence Employment Law (workplace Sexual Harassment) Section 509 Penal Code (insulting Modesty) Prima Facie Test / S.173 CPC Corroboration in Sexual Offence Cases Prosecutorial Discretion to Call Witnesses Delay in Reporting / Late Complaint

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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Public Prosecutor

Prosecution

Abdul Karim bin Abdul Aziz

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Summary (magistrates' Court) / Close of Prosecution Prima Facie Stage (decision to Discharge)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the prosecution established a prima facie case under s.509 Penal Code at the close of its case
  2. 2 Whether the complainant's delayed reporting and contents of the internal complaint undermine credibility and require corroboration
  3. 3 Whether failure of the prosecution to call material witnesses (senior university officials) allows adverse inferences and renders the prosecution case incomplete

Ratio Decidendi

Applying a maximum evaluation the court found the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case under s.509: the complainant's late police report lacked adequate explanation; the internal written complaint (Exhibit D4/D4A) did not allege sexual harassment; prosecution failed to call material witnesses who allegedly received earlier reports; these gaps and permissible inferences favored the accused, therefore the accused was discharged and released without being called to enter his defence.

Court Disposition

Accused Abdul Karim bin Abdul Aziz discharged and released at the close of the prosecution; accused not called to enter defence (discharged under s.173 CPC principles).

Orders

  • Accused Abdul Karim bin Abdul Aziz is discharged and set free; no order to call accused to enter defence.
  • Prosecution to note the court's findings regarding insufficiency of prima facie evidence and evidential gaps.