MOHAMAD FARID BIN MOHAMAD ADZAHA

MOHAMAD FARID BIN MOHAMAD ADZAHA

Accused's early guilty plea and personal mitigation warranted credit but were outweighed by the planned nature of the theft, the vulnerability and loss suffered by an elderly victim and public interest in deterrence; accordingly conviction under s.379 read with s.34 is upheld and a fine of RM12,000 with default 8...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
AA-62RS-30-08/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Parties
Prosecutor: Nor Arfahanim Azureen binti Arfanuddin; Defendant: Mohamad Farid bin Mohamad Adzaha
Court
Sessions Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
6 November 2025
Case Number
AA-62RS-30-08/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Theft/robbery / Conviction and Sentencing; Notice of Appeal Filed
Outcome
Convicted of alternative charge under Section 379 Penal Code read with Section 34; sentenced to fine of RM12,000 or 8 months imprisonment if fine not paid.
Legal Topics
Section 379 Penal Code, Section 34 Penal Code, Guilty Plea Mitigation, Public Interest in Sentencing, Proportionality, Aggravating Factors (planning, Elderly Victim)
Criminal Law Sentencing Theft/robbery Evidence Section 379 Penal Code Section 34 Penal Code Guilty Plea Mitigation Public Interest in Sentencing +2 more

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

Parties

Nor Arfahanim Azureen binti Arfanuddin

Prosecutor

Mohamad Farid bin Mohamad Adzaha

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Theft/robbery / Conviction and Sentencing; Notice of Appeal Filed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Appropriate sentence for offence under s.379 read with s.34
  2. 2 Appropriate weight to give to guilty plea in mitigation
  3. 3 Balancing public interest and individual mitigation

Ratio Decidendi

Accused's early guilty plea and personal mitigation warranted credit but were outweighed by the planned nature of the theft, the vulnerability and loss suffered by an elderly victim and public interest in deterrence; accordingly conviction under s.379 read with s.34 is upheld and a fine of RM12,000 with default 8 months imprisonment is proportionate and lawful.

Court Disposition

Convicted of alternative charge under Section 379 Penal Code read with Section 34; sentenced to fine of RM12,000 or 8 months imprisonment if fine not paid.

Orders

  • Conviction recorded under Section 379 Kanun Keseksaan read with Section 34.
  • Sentence: Fine RM12,000; in default 8 months imprisonment.