LAVINDRAN A/L MUNIANDY

LAVINDRAN A/L MUNIANDY

Bail was refused because the offence charged (s.307 Penal Code) is non-bailable and serious, the accused was untraceable for about 1 month and 16 days after the incident indicating a real risk of absconding, and the accused's failure to report the alleged accident to police or insurer undermined his credibility; applying s.388 CPC and relevant discretionary factors the court concluded refusal of bail was justified.

Citation
WA-62-39-03/2025 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Parties
Prosecution: PENDAKWA RAYA; Defendant: LAVINDRAN A/L MUNIANDY
Court
Sessions Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
21 March 2025
Case Number
WA-62-39-03/2025 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Bail Application / Decision on Bail Application (refused)
Outcome
Bail application refused
Legal Topics
Section 307 Penal Code, Section 388 Criminal Procedure Code, Non Bailable Offence, Flight Risk, Judicial Discretion in Bail
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Bail and Pretrial Procedure Road Traffic Offences Criminal Procedure Section 307 Penal Code Section 388 Criminal Procedure Code Non Bailable Offence Flight Risk +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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PENDAKWA RAYA

Prosecution

LAVINDRAN A/L MUNIANDY

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Bail Application / Decision on Bail Application (refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether bail should be granted for an offence under section 307 of the Penal Code (non-bailable)
  2. 2 Whether the accused presented a real risk of absconding given the period he was not traceable after the incident
  3. 3 How section 388 CPC and discretionary factors apply in a non-bailable offence bail application

Ratio Decidendi

Bail was refused because the offence charged (s.307 Penal Code) is non-bailable and serious, the accused was untraceable for about 1 month and 16 days after the incident indicating a real risk of absconding, and the accused's failure to report the alleged accident to police or insurer undermined his credibility; applying s.388 CPC and relevant discretionary factors the court concluded refusal of bail was justified.

Court Disposition

Bail application refused

Orders

  • Bail denied