1. ) KHALID REDZA BIN SHUIB 2. ) NURSHAFWANI BINTI KHALID REDZA

1. ) KHALID REDZA BIN SHUIB 2. ) NURSHAFWANI BINTI KHALID REDZA

The court accepted the accused's guilty pleas to reduced offences under section 304(a) but afforded limited mitigation because the pleas followed written representations resulting in charge reductions; given the aggravating factors (abuse of vulnerable victims, concealment of bodies), the need to protect public...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
NA-45B-4-06/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant / Accused: Khalid Redza bin Shuib; Respondent / Prosecution: Public Prosecutor
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
9 October 2025
Case Number
NA-45B-4-06/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Appeal Against Sentence / Sentencing Decision at Trial Court
Outcome
Accused convicted on alternative charges under section 304(a) Penal Code and sentenced.
Legal Topics
Homicide, Culpable Homicide Not Amounting to Murder, Sentencing, Victim Impact, Plea Bargaining, Consecutive Sentencing
Criminal Law Homicide Culpable Homicide Not Amounting to Murder Sentencing Victim Impact Plea Bargaining Consecutive Sentencing

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

Parties

Khalid Redza bin Shuib

Appellant / Accused

Public Prosecutor

Respondent / Prosecution

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Appeal Against Sentence / Sentencing Decision at Trial Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused's plea of guilty to reduced charges under section 304(a) should attract significant mitigation
  2. 2 Appropriate quantum of sentence for offences under section 304(a) given aggravating factors including abuse and concealment of body
  3. 3 Whether sentences for two separate offences should run concurrently or consecutively under the one transaction rule

Ratio Decidendi

The court accepted the accused's guilty pleas to reduced offences under section 304(a) but afforded limited mitigation because the pleas followed written representations resulting in charge reductions; given the aggravating factors (abuse of vulnerable victims, concealment of bodies), the need to protect public interest and absence of transactional nexus between the two offences, the appropriate sentences are 15 years for Case No.7 and 17 years for Case No.4, to run consecutively.

Court Disposition

Accused convicted on alternative charges under section 304(a) Penal Code and sentenced.

Orders

  • Case No.7: 15 years imprisonment from date of arrest
  • Case No.4: 17 years imprisonment to commence after completion of sentence for Case No.7