[ ] Faisal Bin Nurdin

[ ] Faisal Bin Nurdin

Appeal dismissed; appellate court declined to disturb Magistrate's acquittal because the trial Magistrate, who saw and heard witnesses, permissibly found defence expert SD4's evidence raised reasonable doubt on critical psychological and credibility issues, there was no safe corroboration of the child's evidence and no proof of criminal force causing injury/fear, and despite the Magistrate's judgment being terse the record supported the acquittal.

Citation
BA-41LB-30-08/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/perayu: Pendakwa Raya; Respondent/accused: Faisal bin Nurdin
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
23 May 2023
Case Number
BA-41LB-30-08/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (section 354 Penal Code) / High Court Hearing on Appeal From Magistrate's Acquittal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; Magistrate Sepang's order of acquittal and discharge of the respondent affirmed.
Legal Topics
Sexual Assault (s.354 Penal Code), Corroboration of Child Testimony, Expert Evidence Conflict, Non Speaking Judgment, Defective Charge Particulars
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Evidence Law Child Protection Procedural Law Sexual Assault (s.354 Penal Code) Corroboration of Child Testimony Expert Evidence Conflict Non Speaking Judgment +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 6 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Appellant/perayu

Faisal bin Nurdin

Respondent/accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (section 354 Penal Code) / High Court Hearing on Appeal From Magistrate's Acquittal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Magistrate erred by relying on defence expert evidence to acquit
  2. 2 Whether the Magistrate's judgment was a non-speaking judgment invalidating the acquittal
  3. 3 Whether the charge was defective for vague time particulars and thus prejudicial

Ratio Decidendi

Appeal dismissed; appellate court declined to disturb Magistrate's acquittal because the trial Magistrate, who saw and heard witnesses, permissibly found defence expert SD4's evidence raised reasonable doubt on critical psychological and credibility issues, there was no safe corroboration of the child's evidence and no proof of criminal force causing injury/fear, and despite the Magistrate's judgment being terse the record supported the acquittal.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; Magistrate Sepang's order of acquittal and discharge of the respondent affirmed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; the order of acquittal and discharge made by the Magistrate Sepang is upheld.