MANIARASAN A/L PATRICK

MANIARASAN A/L PATRICK

The offences were distinct, involved different victims, different facts, different methods and were not parts of a single transaction; therefore sentences should run consecutively. Applying s.282(d) read with s.292(1) CPC the one-year imprisonment for the s.420 offence before this court is to commence upon expiration of the 1 year 6 months imprisonment previously imposed (case AB-83-746-12/2022); whipping is to run consecutively. The aggregate sentence does not offend the totality principle.

Citation
AB-83-747-12/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Parties
Prosecutor: Public Prosecutor; Accused: Maniarasan A/L Patrick
Court
Magistrates' Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
13 January 2023
Case Number
AB-83-747-12/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Sentencing
Outcome
Accused convicted under s.420 Penal Code; sentenced to imprisonment and corporal punishment; sentence to commence after completion of earlier sentence.
Legal Topics
Cheating (s.420 Penal Code), Concurrent Vs Consecutive Sentences, Commencement of Sentence (s.282(d), S.292 Cpc), Previous Convictions Admissibility, One Transaction Rule, Totality Principle
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Criminal Procedure Sentencing Law Cheating (s.420 Penal Code) Concurrent Vs Consecutive Sentences Commencement of Sentence (s.282(d), S.292 Cpc) Previous Convictions Admissibility One Transaction Rule +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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Public Prosecutor

Prosecutor

Maniarasan A/L Patrick

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence should commence immediately or after existing imprisonment
  2. 2 Whether sentences should run concurrently or consecutively
  3. 3 Whether the offences constitute a single transaction

Ratio Decidendi

The offences were distinct, involved different victims, different facts, different methods and were not parts of a single transaction; therefore sentences should run consecutively. Applying s.282(d) read with s.292(1) CPC the one-year imprisonment for the s.420 offence before this court is to commence upon expiration of the 1 year 6 months imprisonment previously imposed (case AB-83-746-12/2022); whipping is to run consecutively. The aggregate sentence does not offend the totality principle.

Court Disposition

Accused convicted under s.420 Penal Code; sentenced to imprisonment and corporal punishment; sentence to commence after completion of earlier sentence.

Orders

  • Accused convicted of offence under section 420 Penal Code.
  • Sentenced to 1 year imprisonment and 1 stroke of whipping for this offence.