FAZRIL ARHAM BIN RAMLI

FAZRIL ARHAM BIN RAMLI

Non‑compliance with section 399 KTJ in relation to P5 did not invalidate the conviction because P5 was corroborative only and the essential elements of the rape offences were proved by the facts (P1) and the appellant's admission; sentencing was within judicial discretion and warranted by seriousness and public interest, therefore the appeal is dismissed and conviction and sentences are affirmed.

Citation
DA-42S-2-08/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant: Fazril Arham bin Ramli; Respondent: Pendakwa Raya
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
29 March 2022
Case Number
DA-42S-2-08/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (conviction and Sentence) / Appeal Determination by High Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed
Legal Topics
Rape, Possession of Obscene Material, Compliance With Section 399 Criminal Procedure Code, Concurrent Vs Consecutive Sentences
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Evidence Sentencing Sexual Offences Rape Possession of Obscene Material Compliance With Section 399 Criminal Procedure Code Concurrent Vs Consecutive Sentences

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fazril Arham bin Ramli

Appellant

Pendakwa Raya

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (conviction and Sentence) / Appeal Determination by High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether failure to comply with section 399 Kanun Tatacara Jenayah (Criminal Procedure Code) in relation to a medical/forensic document vitiates the conviction
  2. 2 Whether the medical record (P5) was essential or merely corroborative evidence
  3. 3 Whether the sentence imposed by the Sessions Court was manifestly excessive and should be reduced

Ratio Decidendi

Non‑compliance with section 399 KTJ in relation to P5 did not invalidate the conviction because P5 was corroborative only and the essential elements of the rape offences were proved by the facts (P1) and the appellant's admission; sentencing was within judicial discretion and warranted by seriousness and public interest, therefore the appeal is dismissed and conviction and sentences are affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed

Orders

  • Appeal is dismissed
  • Convictions and sentences imposed by the Sessions Court are upheld