FIRDAUS RIZAL BIN ABDUL MANAN

FIRDAUS RIZAL BIN ABDUL MANAN

Given prolonged offending over years involving multiple distinct transactions and large aggregate losses to different victims, the court found deterrence and punishment warranted; mitigation was considered but insufficient to merit concurrent or significantly reduced sentences, therefore imposed per‑count custody, caning and fine with imprisonment to run separately for each count.

Citation
AC-62K-15-12/2025 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Parties
Prosecution: Public Prosecutor; Accused: Firdaus Rizal bin Abdul Manan
Court
Sessions Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
22 December 2025
Case Number
AC-62K-15-12/2025 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Sentencing (appeal Against Sentence)
Outcome
Accused convicted on nine counts of criminal breach of trust under s.409 and sentenced.
Legal Topics
Criminal Breach of Trust, Section 409 Penal Code, Mitigation in Sentencing, Consecutive Vs Concurrent Sentences, Corporal Punishment
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Trusts and Fiduciary Duties Sentencing Law Criminal Breach of Trust Section 409 Penal Code Mitigation in Sentencing Consecutive Vs Concurrent Sentences Corporal Punishment

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 4 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Public Prosecutor

Prosecution

Firdaus Rizal bin Abdul Manan

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Sentencing (appeal Against Sentence)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Appropriate sentence for multiple counts of criminal breach of trust under s.409 Penal Code
  2. 2 Whether sentences should run concurrently or separately
  3. 3 Weight to be given to mitigation: age, family dependence, health and guilty plea

Ratio Decidendi

Given prolonged offending over years involving multiple distinct transactions and large aggregate losses to different victims, the court found deterrence and punishment warranted; mitigation was considered but insufficient to merit concurrent or significantly reduced sentences, therefore imposed per‑count custody, caning and fine with imprisonment to run separately for each count.

Court Disposition

Accused convicted on nine counts of criminal breach of trust under s.409 and sentenced.

Orders

  • For each of the nine counts: 2 years imprisonment, 2 strokes of the rotan, and a fine of RM10,000; in default of payment of fine, 6 months imprisonment.
  • Imprisonment sentences to run separately (consecutively) for each count.