NASRUL HAQURI BIN ABDUL LATIF

NASRUL HAQURI BIN ABDUL LATIF

Prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case under s41(1) RTA 1987 because material evidence was consistent with the defence version (investigating officer’s findings, damage pattern and absence of independent witnesses), exhibits did not prove dangerous driving, and on maximum evaluation and favourable inferences the court must accept the defence version; therefore accused discharged and not called to enter defence.

Citation
MA-83-426-04/2021 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Parties
Prosecution: Public Prosecutor; Accused: Nasrul Haquri bin Abdul Latif
Court
Magistrates' Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
29 March 2022
Case Number
MA-83-426-04/2021 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Road Traffic (suspected Dangerous Driving Causing Death) / End of Prosecution Case; Accused Discharged and Released (no Prima Facie Established)
Outcome
Accused discharged and released at the close of the prosecution case for want of a prima facie case under s41(1) RTA 1987
Legal Topics
Dangerous/reckless Driving Causing Death, Prima Facie Standard, Section 41(1) Road Transport Act 1987, Application to Amend to Section 43(1)
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Road Traffic Law Evidence Law Dangerous/reckless Driving Causing Death Prima Facie Standard Section 41(1) Road Transport Act 1987 Application to Amend to Section 43(1)

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

Parties

Public Prosecutor

Prosecution

Nasrul Haquri bin Abdul Latif

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Road Traffic (suspected Dangerous Driving Causing Death) / End of Prosecution Case; Accused Discharged and Released (no Prima Facie Established)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused drove recklessly, at speed or in a dangerous manner within s41(1) RTA 1987
  2. 2 Whether the prosecution established a prima facie case to call the accused to enter his defence
  3. 3 Whether evidence supported amendment of the charge to s43(1) or to convict without calling defence

Ratio Decidendi

Prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case under s41(1) RTA 1987 because material evidence was consistent with the defence version (investigating officer’s findings, damage pattern and absence of independent witnesses), exhibits did not prove dangerous driving, and on maximum evaluation and favourable inferences the court must accept the defence version; therefore accused discharged and not called to enter defence.

Court Disposition

Accused discharged and released at the close of the prosecution case for want of a prima facie case under s41(1) RTA 1987

Orders

  • Accused discharged and set free without being called to enter defence