ABDUL MU'IZZ BIN MOHAMAD ZIN

ABDUL MU'IZZ BIN MOHAMAD ZIN

The court found the prosecution proved all essential elements of robbery under section 394 — the vehicle was taken from the victim's possession without consent by use of violence, supported by witness and medical evidence; the defence claim of taking the vehicle as security for a debt did not negate dishonest intention and is not a lawful defence to robbery; accordingly the accused was convicted and sentenced to a custodial and deterrent term (10 years imprisonment and 3 strokes).

Citation
CA-62RS-6-08/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Parties
Prosecutor: Pendakwa Raya; Defendant: Abdul Mu’izz bin Mohamad Zin
Court
Sessions Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
8 August 2025
Case Number
CA-62RS-6-08/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Procedural Posture
Criminal (robbery) / Conviction and Sentencing
Outcome
Accused convicted of robbery under section 394 Kanun Keseksaan and sentenced; accused had earlier pleaded guilty to the charge under section 506.
Legal Topics
Robbery, Theft, Assault, Criminal Intimidation, Sentencing, Prima Facie
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Robbery Theft Assault Criminal Intimidation Sentencing Prima Facie

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Prosecutor

Abdul Mu’izz bin Mohamad Zin

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal (robbery) / Conviction and Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused committed robbery under section 394 Kanun Keseksaan
  2. 2 Whether taking the car could be a lawful exercise of a creditor's right or constituted dishonest intention (theft)
  3. 3 Whether prosecution proved use of violence/force and resulting injury

Ratio Decidendi

The court found the prosecution proved all essential elements of robbery under section 394 — the vehicle was taken from the victim's possession without consent by use of violence, supported by witness and medical evidence; the defence claim of taking the vehicle as security for a debt did not negate dishonest intention and is not a lawful defence to robbery; accordingly the accused was convicted and sentenced to a custodial and deterrent term (10 years imprisonment and 3 strokes).

Court Disposition

Accused convicted of robbery under section 394 Kanun Keseksaan and sentenced; accused had earlier pleaded guilty to the charge under section 506.

Orders

  • Convicted under section 394 Kanun Keseksaan.
  • Sentenced to 10 years' imprisonment and 3 strokes of the rotan for the offence under section 394.