PENDAKWARAYA Timbalan Izyani Hayati binti Mohd Ruslan

PENDAKWARAYA Timbalan Izyani Hayati binti Mohd Ruslan

Deposition P23 was admissible but, when weighed with other evidence, the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused caused hurt at the specific date and time charged and failed to prove the element of employment without a valid pass; accordingly no prima facie case was established for either s.324 Penal Code or s.55B Immigration Act and the accused was acquitted and discharged.

Citation
BH-82-2-06/2019 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Parties
Prosecution: Pendakwa Raya; Accused: Izyani Hayati binti Mohd Ruslan
Court
Magistrates' Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
30 April 2021
Case Number
BH-82-2-06/2019 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Judgment (magistrate Court Acquittal)
Outcome
Accused acquitted and discharged of both charges
Legal Topics
Causing Hurt (s.324 Penal Code), Employment of Foreign National Without Permit (s.55 B Immigration Act 1959/63), Admissibility and Weight of Depositions (s.41 a Immigration Act; S.114 Evidence Act), Burden of Proof and Material Particular (date/time)
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Immigration Law Evidence Law Criminal Procedure Causing Hurt (s.324 Penal Code) Employment of Foreign National Without Permit (s.55 B Immigration Act 1959/63) Admissibility and Weight of Depositions (s.41 a Immigration Act; S.114 Evidence Act) Burden of Proof and Material Particular (date/time)

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Prosecution

Izyani Hayati binti Mohd Ruslan

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Judgment (magistrate Court Acquittal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused caused hurt to the complainant on the specific date and time alleged (18.5.2019 ~1400hrs)
  2. 2 Whether the deposition (P23) of a removed/non‑testifying witness is admissible and sufficient to establish that the complainant was employed without a valid pass
  3. 3 Whether any statutory presumption shifts the burden to the accused to prove existence of a valid pass

Ratio Decidendi

Deposition P23 was admissible but, when weighed with other evidence, the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused caused hurt at the specific date and time charged and failed to prove the element of employment without a valid pass; accordingly no prima facie case was established for either s.324 Penal Code or s.55B Immigration Act and the accused was acquitted and discharged.

Court Disposition

Accused acquitted and discharged of both charges

Orders

  • Accused acquitted and discharged