1. SYED MOHD HASNIE BIN SAYED MOHD KHAN 2. MAMADOU NDAW

1. SYED MOHD HASNIE BIN SAYED MOHD KHAN 2. MAMADOU NDAW

The Sessions Court properly evaluated all evidence at the close of defence after the High Court directed the accused to be called; prosecution failed to adduce any direct evidence that the 1st accused made the false statement in Form 32A or that the 2nd accused abetted that act, and the defence raised a reasonable...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
WA-42LB-15-06/2020, WA-42LB-16-06/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant (public Prosecutor): Public Prosecutor; Respondent (1st Accused): Syed Mohd Hasnie bin Sayed Mohd Khan; Respondent (2nd Accused): Mamadou Ndaw
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
17 February 2021
Case Number
WA-42LB-15-06/2020, WA-42LB-16-06/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / High Court Hearing and Judgment on Appeal Against Acquittal
Outcome
Appeals dismissed; decision of Sessions Court affirming acquittal and discharge of both accused upheld
Legal Topics
False Statement in Company Document, Forgery, Abetment, Appeal Against Acquittal, Prima Facie, Reasonable Doubt, Section 364(2) Companies Act 1965, Section 109 Penal Code
Companies Law Criminal Law Evidence Procedure False Statement in Company Document Forgery Abetment Appeal Against Acquittal +4 more

Source-derived case record

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Public Prosecutor

Appellant (public Prosecutor)

Syed Mohd Hasnie bin Sayed Mohd Khan

Respondent (1st Accused)

Mamadou Ndaw

Respondent (2nd Accused)

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / High Court Hearing and Judgment on Appeal Against Acquittal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution proved the 1st accused made a false statement in Form 32A under s.364(2) Companies Act 1965
  2. 2 Whether the 2nd accused abetted the alleged offence under s.109 Penal Code
  3. 3 Whether, after the High Court directed the accused to call defence, the trial court correctly evaluated all evidence at close of defence and whether the defence raised a reasonable doubt

Ratio Decidendi

The Sessions Court properly evaluated all evidence at the close of defence after the High Court directed the accused to be called; prosecution failed to adduce any direct evidence that the 1st accused made the false statement in Form 32A or that the 2nd accused abetted that act, and the defence raised a reasonable doubt (including explanations, email instructions, lack of attestations, timing and motive relating to PW2), therefore the acquittal was rightly affirmed and the appeals dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed; decision of Sessions Court affirming acquittal and discharge of both accused upheld

Orders

  • Both appeals dismissed
  • Decision of the learned Sessions Court Judge acquitting and discharging the respondents is affirmed