[TIMBALAN ] SHAMSUL BAHRI BIN MUSA

[TIMBALAN ] SHAMSUL BAHRI BIN MUSA

SCJ 2 erred by failing to undertake a maximum evaluation of the whole evidence and by treating the case as if entrustment and mens rea were established; the charges lacked requisite particulars (mode/actus reus and mens rea) and prosecution did not prove entrustment or dominion by the accused; conviction was therefore unsafe and must be set aside, resulting in acquittal and discharge.

Citation
WA-42H-17-09/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/accused: Shamsul Bahri bin Musa; Respondent/prosecution: Public Prosecutor
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
27 March 2024
Case Number
WA-42H-17-09/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence (appeal Against Sentence) / High Court Appellate Judgment on Merits
Outcome
Appeal allowed in favour of accused; conviction and sentence set aside; accused acquitted and discharged; prosecution's appeal against sentence dismissed.
Legal Topics
Criminal Breach of Trust, Entrustment and Dominion, Mens Rea, Framing of Charges, Duty of Trial Judge to Evaluate Evidence, Adverse Inference for Non Production of Documents
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Criminal Procedure Evidence Law Corporate/financial Transactions Criminal Breach of Trust Entrustment and Dominion Mens Rea Framing of Charges +2 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 5 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shamsul Bahri bin Musa

Appellant/accused

Public Prosecutor

Respondent/prosecution

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence (appeal Against Sentence) / High Court Appellate Judgment on Merits

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution proved ingredients of criminal breach of trust (entrustment, actus reus, mens rea) beyond reasonable doubt
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge (SCJ 2) properly evaluated defence evidence together with prosecution evidence as required by s173(m)(i) CPC
  3. 3 Whether the charges were properly framed with requisite particulars under CPC ss152,153,154

Ratio Decidendi

SCJ 2 erred by failing to undertake a maximum evaluation of the whole evidence and by treating the case as if entrustment and mens rea were established; the charges lacked requisite particulars (mode/actus reus and mens rea) and prosecution did not prove entrustment or dominion by the accused; conviction was therefore unsafe and must be set aside, resulting in acquittal and discharge.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in favour of accused; conviction and sentence set aside; accused acquitted and discharged; prosecution's appeal against sentence dismissed.

Orders

  • Conviction entered by Sessions Court (SCJ 2) quashed.
  • Judgment of guilt set aside and accused Shamsul Bahri bin Musa acquitted and discharged of all four charges under s408 Penal Code.