KHANTAN A/L NAMASIVAYAM [ ]

KHANTAN A/L NAMASIVAYAM [ ]

With the prosecution's consent to reduce the charge and the appellants' pleas to culpable homicide not amounting to murder (s.304(a) read with s.34), the Court, applying sentencing principles of public interest, mitigation and current sentencing trends, set aside the death sentences and imposed concurrent custodial terms of 12 years' imprisonment from date of arrest (17 August 2017).

Citation
W-05(M)-117-03/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant: Nagarajan a/l Alagasan; Appellant: Vikneswaran a/l Kalimuthu; Appellant: Dineswaran a/l Sivalingam; Appellant: Logan a/l Namasivayam; Appellant: Khantan a/l Namasivayam; Respondent: Public Prosecutor
Court
M
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
9 September 2025
Case Number
W-05(M)-117-03/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence After Conviction; Charge Reduced and Appellants Pleaded Guilty to Reduced Charge
Outcome
Death sentences set aside; convictions substituted to culpable homicide not amounting to murder (referred to s.299 and sentenced under s.304(a) read with s.34 of the Penal Code); each appellant sentenced to 12 years' imprisonment from date of arrest (17 August 2017).
Legal Topics
Murder, Culpable Homicide Not Amounting to Murder, Charge Reduction, Section 302 Penal Code, Section 304(a) Penal Code, Section 34 Penal Code, Sentencing Trends
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Homicide Sentencing Murder Culpable Homicide Not Amounting to Murder Charge Reduction Section 302 Penal Code Section 304(a) Penal Code +2 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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nagarajan a/l Alagasan

Appellant

Vikneswaran a/l Kalimuthu

Appellant

Dineswaran a/l Sivalingam

Appellant

Logan a/l Namasivayam

Appellant

Khantan a/l Namasivayam

Appellant

Public Prosecutor

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence After Conviction; Charge Reduced and Appellants Pleaded Guilty to Reduced Charge

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether conviction could be reduced from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder
  2. 2 Appropriate sentence after reduction of charge
  3. 3 Application of common intention (s.34) and culpable homicide provisions (s.299/304(a))

Ratio Decidendi

With the prosecution's consent to reduce the charge and the appellants' pleas to culpable homicide not amounting to murder (s.304(a) read with s.34), the Court, applying sentencing principles of public interest, mitigation and current sentencing trends, set aside the death sentences and imposed concurrent custodial terms of 12 years' imprisonment from date of arrest (17 August 2017).

Court Disposition

Death sentences set aside; convictions substituted to culpable homicide not amounting to murder (referred to s.299 and sentenced under s.304(a) read with s.34 of the Penal Code); each appellant sentenced to 12 years' imprisonment from date of arrest (17 August 2017).

Orders

  • Set aside the death sentences imposed by the High Court.
  • Convictions substituted to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under section 304(a) read with section 34 (record refers to s.299 as defining culpable homicide).