Muhammad Nizar Nufail Bin Abd Aziz [ ]

Muhammad Nizar Nufail Bin Abd Aziz [ ]

Court affirmed the conviction; it accepted that imprisonment under s.42(1) Road Transport Act 1987 is mandatory in form but found the custodial sentence of six months to be inappropriate for a young first‑time offender; balancing public interest and mitigation and having regard to three days' remand, the court allowed the appeal against the incarceration element, substituted an increased fine of RM8,000 (in default six months imprisonment), and observed that remand must be credited and that a nominal custodial term (one day) would meet the statutory mandate though final handling of that issue is left to the appellate court.

Citation
AA-41S-11-11/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/accused: Muhammad Nizar Nufail bin Abd Aziz; Respondent/prosecution: Pendakwa Raya
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
18 January 2023
Case Number
AA-41S-11-11/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Magistrate to High Court Concerning Conviction and Sentence; Prosecutorial Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Conviction affirmed; appeal against sentence allowed in part.
Legal Topics
Mandatory Sentence, Remand Credit, Sentencing Discretion, Dangerous Driving, Section 42(1) Road Transport Act 1987
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Road Transport Law Sentencing Law Procedure Mandatory Sentence Remand Credit Sentencing Discretion Dangerous Driving +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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Muhammad Nizar Nufail bin Abd Aziz

Appellant/accused

Pendakwa Raya

Respondent/prosecution

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Magistrate to High Court Concerning Conviction and Sentence; Prosecutorial Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether mandatory imprisonment under s.42(1) Road Transport Act 1987 can be avoided or mitigated by consideration of remand time
  2. 2 Whether remand period may be credited against a mandatory custodial sentence
  3. 3 Whether imprisonment is appropriate for a young first‑time offender for this dangerous driving offence

Ratio Decidendi

Court affirmed the conviction; it accepted that imprisonment under s.42(1) Road Transport Act 1987 is mandatory in form but found the custodial sentence of six months to be inappropriate for a young first‑time offender; balancing public interest and mitigation and having regard to three days' remand, the court allowed the appeal against the incarceration element, substituted an increased fine of RM8,000 (in default six months imprisonment), and observed that remand must be credited and that a nominal custodial term (one day) would meet the statutory mandate though final handling of that issue is left to the appellate court.

Court Disposition

Conviction affirmed; appeal against sentence allowed in part.

Orders

  • Conviction of the appellant is affirmed.
  • Original custodial sentence of six months imprisonment is set aside and substituted with a fine of RM8,000 and in default of payment six months imprisonment.