AHMAD RADZI BIN ROSLAN

AHMAD RADZI BIN ROSLAN

The High Court upheld the conviction because the child victim's testimony, when assessed holistically, was credible and consistent on material points and supported by medical evidence of bruising consistent with blunt penetration; re-examination was a permissible clarification not new evidence; the late affidavit...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
AA-42JSKS-1-02/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant: Ahmad Radzi bin Roslan; Respondent: Public Prosecutor (Pendakwa Raya)
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
28 October 2024
Case Number
AA-42JSKS-1-02/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / High Court Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; cross-appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed; conditional suspension under s.311 permitted as previously ordered
Legal Topics
Rape, Corroboration, Child Witness Credibility, Re Examination of Witness, Expert Medical Evidence, Affidavit Evidence, Appeal on Findings of Fact, Sentencing Discretion
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Evidence Sentencing Procedure Rape Corroboration Child Witness Credibility +5 more

Source-derived case record

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ahmad Radzi bin Roslan

Appellant

Public Prosecutor (Pendakwa Raya)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / High Court Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether minor inconsistencies in the child victim's testimony undermine the prosecution case
  2. 2 Whether re-examination evidence constituted new evidence or permissible clarification
  3. 3 Whether absence of hymen tear or spermatozoa negates penetration or rape

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court upheld the conviction because the child victim's testimony, when assessed holistically, was credible and consistent on material points and supported by medical evidence of bruising consistent with blunt penetration; re-examination was a permissible clarification not new evidence; the late affidavit (Exhibit D15) and SD2 were unreliable/afterthought or interested and insufficient to raise reasonable doubt; and the sentence fell within judicial discretion, therefore both the appeal and cross-appeal were dismissed though conditional suspension under s.311 was permitted as previously ordered.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; cross-appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed; conditional suspension under s.311 permitted as previously ordered

Orders

  • Appeal by Ahmad Radzi bin Roslan dismissed
  • Cross-appeal by Public Prosecutor dismissed