[Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia (SPRM)] SABUDIN BIN MOHD SALLEH

[Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia (SPRM)] SABUDIN BIN MOHD SALLEH

The High Court allowed the prosecution appeal, set aside the sessions court acquittal and convicted the accused under section 17(a) MACC Act because the prosecution proved on the evidence (oral testimony of SP3 and SP2 and exhibit P2) that the accused received RM200,000 corruptly; the statutory presumption under s50(1) applied and the accused failed to rebut it on a balance of probabilities; appellate substitution of conviction pursuant to s316(a) CPC was appropriate and sentence was imposed accordingly.

Citation
WA-42R(A)-4-09/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Prosecution/appellant: Public Prosecutor; Accused/respondent: Sabudin bin Mohd Salleh
Court
A
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
15 August 2023
Case Number
WA-42R(A)-4-09/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (anti‑corruption) / High Court Appellate Judgment on Challenge to Sessions Court Acquittal and Sentencing on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; sessions court acquittal set aside; accused convicted on two amended charges under section 17(a) MACC Act and sentenced
Legal Topics
Bribery, Gratification, Presumption of Corruption (s50(1) MACC Act), Burden of Proof, Accomplice Evidence, Amendment of Charges, Judicial Review on Appeal, Sentencing, Appeal Substitution (s316 Cpc)
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Anti‑corruption Law Evidence Procedure Administrative Law Bribery Gratification Presumption of Corruption (s50(1) MACC Act) +6 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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Public Prosecutor

Prosecution/appellant

Sabudin bin Mohd Salleh

Accused/respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (anti‑corruption) / High Court Appellate Judgment on Challenge to Sessions Court Acquittal and Sentencing on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sessions court judge erred in acquitting the accused after HCJ1 had found a prima facie case and ordered him to enter his defence
  2. 2 Whether the presumption under section 50(1) MACC Act applied and whether the accused rebutted it on a balance of probabilities
  3. 3 Whether witnesses SP2 and SP3 were accomplices whose evidence required corroboration

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court allowed the prosecution appeal, set aside the sessions court acquittal and convicted the accused under section 17(a) MACC Act because the prosecution proved on the evidence (oral testimony of SP3 and SP2 and exhibit P2) that the accused received RM200,000 corruptly; the statutory presumption under s50(1) applied and the accused failed to rebut it on a balance of probabilities; appellate substitution of conviction pursuant to s316(a) CPC was appropriate and sentence was imposed accordingly.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; sessions court acquittal set aside; accused convicted on two amended charges under section 17(a) MACC Act and sentenced

Orders

  • Convicted of two counts under section 17(a) MACC Act pursuant to substituted finding under section 316(a) CPC
  • Imprisonment: 4 years for first charge and 4 years for second charge, terms to run concurrently