PENDAKWARAYA PUBLIC PROSECUTOR GUY BOON LEANG

PENDAKWARAYA PUBLIC PROSECUTOR GUY BOON LEANG

The High Court held that the Sessions Court correctly read the amended charge under the CPC, the prosecution proved the elements of s326 beyond reasonable doubt based on credible eyewitness and medical evidence, the accused failed to establish private defence on balance of probabilities, and the sentence of a...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
WA-42S-23-05/2019; WA-42H-25-05/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant: Guy Boon Leang; Respondent: Public Prosecutor
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
22 June 2020
Case Number
WA-42S-23-05/2019; WA-42H-25-05/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal and Cross Appeal / High Court Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; conviction under s326 Penal Code upheld; cross-appeal on sentence dismissed
Legal Topics
Grievous Hurt (s326 Penal Code), Private Defence (ss96 97 Penal Code), Amendment and Reading of Charge (cpc Ss158 160), Summary Trial Procedure (cpc Ss173, 182 A), Binding Over (cpc S294), Corroboration of Eyewitness Testimony
Criminal Law Criminal Procedure Evidence Sentencing Grievous Hurt (s326 Penal Code) Private Defence (ss96 97 Penal Code) Amendment and Reading of Charge (cpc Ss158 160) Summary Trial Procedure (cpc Ss173, 182 A) +2 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 6 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Guy Boon Leang

Appellant

Public Prosecutor

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal and Cross Appeal / High Court Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether amended charge could be read to accused at close of defence under CPC ss158-160 and s159 proviso
  2. 2 Whether prosecution proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt for offence under s326 Penal Code
  3. 3 Whether accused validly pleaded private defence (self-defence) under ss96-97 Penal Code

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court held that the Sessions Court correctly read the amended charge under the CPC, the prosecution proved the elements of s326 beyond reasonable doubt based on credible eyewitness and medical evidence, the accused failed to establish private defence on balance of probabilities, and the sentence of a two-year binding over under s294 CPC with one surety of RM5000 was appropriate and not subject to appellate interference absent error in principle.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; conviction under s326 Penal Code upheld; cross-appeal on sentence dismissed

Orders

  • Conviction under section 326 Penal Code affirmed against the accused
  • Sentence affirmed: accused bound over under section 294 of the Criminal Procedure Code for two years with one surety of RM5000