1. ) PRATHAN A/L AH WIN 2. ) MOHD ROSZAIMI BIN MOHD ROOS

1. ) PRATHAN A/L AH WIN 2. ) MOHD ROSZAIMI BIN MOHD ROOS

The court upheld an eight-year custodial sentence because the offence under section 26A Akta 670 read with section 34 Kanun Keseksaan is grave, public interest and deterrence outweigh the largely personal mitigating factors, precedent indicates an 8–10 year range for similar offences, and the statutory power to forfeit the vehicle applies.

Citation
KA-45SOM-1-07/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Prosecutor: Pendakwa Raya; Accused: Prathan a/l Ah Win; Accused: Mohd Roszaimi bin Mohd Roos
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
4 November 2025
Case Number
KA-45SOM-1-07/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Human Smuggling Under SOSMA (section 26 A) / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; sentence of 8 years imprisonment from date of arrest upheld and forfeiture of vehicle ordered
Legal Topics
Human Smuggling, Sentencing, Deterrence, Forfeiture of Property, Admissibility of Exhibits
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Immigration Law National Security Law Evidence Law Human Smuggling Sentencing Deterrence Forfeiture of Property +1 more

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

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Prosecutor

Prathan a/l Ah Win

Accused

Mohd Roszaimi bin Mohd Roos

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Human Smuggling Under SOSMA (section 26 A) / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Appropriate sentence for offence under section 26A Akta 670 read with section 34 Kanun Keseksaan
  2. 2 Weight to be given to mitigation (early plea, personal circumstances) versus public interest and deterrence
  3. 3 Applicability of forfeiture under section 36(2) Akta 670

Ratio Decidendi

The court upheld an eight-year custodial sentence because the offence under section 26A Akta 670 read with section 34 Kanun Keseksaan is grave, public interest and deterrence outweigh the largely personal mitigating factors, precedent indicates an 8–10 year range for similar offences, and the statutory power to forfeit the vehicle applies.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; sentence of 8 years imprisonment from date of arrest upheld and forfeiture of vehicle ordered

Orders

  • Appeal against sentence dismissed
  • Sentence of eight (8) years imprisonment confirmed to run from date of arrest