HENRYZAL BIN HATTO

HENRYZAL BIN HATTO

The High Court held the magistrate did not err in finding SP1's evidence credible and corroborated; the defence failed to raise reasonable doubt. Conviction under section 420 read with section 34 Penal Code was affirmed. However the original sentence was manifestly inadequate; in the exercise of appellate sentencing powers the court increased imprisonment to reflect seriousness and deter similar offences and ordered a fine and restitution under statutory provisions.

Citation
JB-41H-16-05/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant: Henryzal bin Hatto; Respondent: Public Prosecutor
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
1 April 2021
Case Number
JB-41H-16-05/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / High Court Appellate Judgment on Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Conviction affirmed; sentence increased on cross-appeal by the prosecution
Legal Topics
Cheating (section 420 Penal Code), Accomplice Evidence and Corroboration, Admissibility and Cross Examination (sections 145, 154 Evidence Act), Prima Facie Standard, Restitution (section 426 Cr Pc)
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Evidence Sentencing Cheating (section 420 Penal Code) Accomplice Evidence and Corroboration Admissibility and Cross Examination (sections 145,154 Evidence Act) Prima Facie Standard Restitution (section 426 Cr Pc)

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 6 Authorities cited 28 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Henryzal bin Hatto

Appellant

Public Prosecutor

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / High Court Appellate Judgment on Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether SP1's evidence was reliable to establish a prima facie case
  2. 2 Whether contradictions between SP1 and SP10 undermined prosecution case
  3. 3 Whether SP10 could be cross-examined under sections 145 and 154 Evidence Act and the effect of his accomplice status

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court held the magistrate did not err in finding SP1's evidence credible and corroborated; the defence failed to raise reasonable doubt. Conviction under section 420 read with section 34 Penal Code was affirmed. However the original sentence was manifestly inadequate; in the exercise of appellate sentencing powers the court increased imprisonment to reflect seriousness and deter similar offences and ordered a fine and restitution under statutory provisions.

Court Disposition

Conviction affirmed; sentence increased on cross-appeal by the prosecution

Orders

  • Conviction under section 420 read with section 34 Penal Code affirmed
  • Sentence increased to 7 years imprisonment commencing from date of arrest