MUHAMMAD EIZAT BIN HAZMI [ ]

MUHAMMAD EIZAT BIN HAZMI [ ]

The High Court held the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant drove dangerously by encroaching into the opposite lane and, due to his fault (including excessive speed and failure to reduce speed at a blind corner), caused two collisions that resulted in nine deaths; the defence version was...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
AA-41S-11-09/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant: Muhammad Eizat bin Hazmi; Respondent: Public Prosecutor
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
18 September 2023
Case Number
AA-41S-11-09/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Magistrate's Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed
Legal Topics
Dangerous Driving Causing Death, Section 41(1) Road Transport Act 1987, Adverse Inference S.114(g) Evidence Act 1950, Sentencing Appellate Review
Criminal Law Road Transport Law Evidence Law Dangerous Driving Causing Death Section 41(1) Road Transport Act 1987 Adverse Inference S.114(g) Evidence Act 1950 Sentencing Appellate Review

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

Parties

Muhammad Eizat bin Hazmi

Appellant

Public Prosecutor

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Magistrate's Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant drove in a manner dangerous to the public under s.41(1) RTA 1987
  2. 2 Whether the prosecution proved causation of the deaths
  3. 3 Whether an adverse inference should be drawn for non-production of an alleged police report under s.114(g) Evidence Act 1950

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court held the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant drove dangerously by encroaching into the opposite lane and, due to his fault (including excessive speed and failure to reduce speed at a blind corner), caused two collisions that resulted in nine deaths; the defence version was unreasonable, the absence of a specific police report did not justify an adverse inference, and the sentence was not manifestly excessive, therefore the conviction and sentence were affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and conviction under s.41(1) Road Transport Act 1987 affirmed
  • Appellant sentenced to 4 years imprisonment from 30 August 2022